On Sun, 2008-02-17 at 08:16 +0100, Mario Ivankovits wrote:
If we find a way how these could work I wouldn't mind if we get rid of the
current solution.
Your wish is my command.
When thinking about it, this one wasn't possible with my solution either. So,
probably lets not put this
, 2008 9:08 am
Subject: Re: [orchestra] conversation-scoped converters
To: Reply-MyFaces Development dev@myfaces.apache.orgTo: MyFaces
Development dev@myfaces.apache.org
On Sun, 2008-02-17 at 08:16 +0100, Mario Ivankovits wrote:
If we find a way how these could work I wouldn't mind if we get
On Sun, 2008-02-17 at 09:44 +0100, Mario Ivankovits wrote:
Sorry for top posting, the handy client makes it hard to make it right.
What you have done so far is great I think.
But there is a third way of configuring a converter.
This is configuring a converter with its own tag, like
Hi!
But there is a third way of configuring a converter.
This is configuring a converter with its own tag, like dateTimeConverter.
This allows you to configure this very instance of the converter.
We don't need to support pulling f:dateTimeConverter instances from
Spring do we? Those
Hi,
Currently in Orchestra a lot of effort goes into allowing this:
someComponent id=comp1 value=
f:converter id=convId/
/someComponent
where the actual converter instance attached to comp1 is pulled from
Spring.
In particular, this is AFAIK the only reason why class
Hi!
It *is* useful to be able to create converters that have access to
conversation scopes, which in turn mean they need to be instantiated by
pulling them from Spring. But this syntax is already supported by jsf:
someComponent id=comp2 converter=#{convId}/
I don't think so. Isnt it that the
Hi Mario,
Nice to see you back!
On Sat, 2008-02-16 at 16:37 +0100, Mario Ivankovits wrote:
Hi!
It *is* useful to be able to create converters that have access to
conversation scopes, which in turn mean they need to be instantiated by
pulling them from Spring. But this syntax is already
Hi!
Nice to see you back!
Hehe - Thanks! Yea, and in after-ski-mode now ;-)
Nope. The EL expression returns a Converter instance
ah - wasn't aware from top of my head.
Ok, so probably the ony thing we have to take a look at is how those converters
work installed as child of a component using
On Sat, 2008-02-16 at 18:10 +0100, Mario Ivankovits wrote:
Hi!
Nice to see you back!
Hehe - Thanks! Yea, and in after-ski-mode now ;-)
Go on, rub it in .. I've been spending all my spare time working on an
Orchestra release :-)
Nope. The EL expression returns a Converter instance
Hi!
Go on, rub it in .. I've been spending all my spare time working on an
Orchestra release :-)
That's fun too, isn't it ;-)
If we find a way how these could work I wouldn't mind if we get rid of the
current solution.
Your wish is my command.
When thinking about it, this one wasn't
10 matches
Mail list logo
