Jacob,
Perhaps I'm just a big idiot, or perhaps I don't have enough time in the day to
fully explore this whole idea, but I'm still having the same problem I had last
time we discussed this issue: "huh?"
I don't _get it_ and I won't really until someone can pony up and at least
provide some bas
My entire thoughts on the EL-API thing is this:
I only care about using the EL API if I get the additional tool support. IDEA,
for example, does some decent code completion when you do ${ ... } in a JSP. It
doesn't, on the other hand, do anything useful when I type or use %{ ... } in another We
Wasn't there an agreement that the tangents would indicate what they were in
posts, like [SHALE] or [JSF]. It is difficult enough around here to figure
out what is going on without this sort of discussion going on as if it were
struts.
On 4/10/06, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> O
Gary VanMatre wrote:
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> So again, at it's core for JSF 2.0, we refactor FacesContext to
instead have a
> ProcessingContext (shorter name?) instead of a UIViewRoot. The
> lifecycle/interceptors instead inter rogate the ProcessingContext
for alternate
> behavior while a
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Great, it sounds like there's an overlap of ideas here :-)
>
> Fundamentally, my approach to JSF 2.0 is to continue the CoR patterns with
> the
> various application handlers, while sticking to the 5 phases of MVC, allowing
> other interceptors to provide intermed
On 4/10/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Jacob Hookom wrote:
> > The NavigationHandler has that default behavior. But much like WebWork
> > allows the pluggable ActionMapper, all parts of JSF are pluggable in
> > that manner. Seam and SWF are two examples of plugging in alternate
> > l
Great, it sounds like there's an overlap of ideas here :-)
Fundamentally, my approach to JSF 2.0 is to continue the CoR patterns with the
various application handlers, while sticking to the 5 phases of MVC, allowing
other interceptors to provide intermediate processing within those 5 distinct
p
Jacob Hookom wrote:
The NavigationHandler has that default behavior. But much like WebWork
allows the pluggable ActionMapper, all parts of JSF are pluggable in
that manner. Seam and SWF are two examples of plugging in alternate
logic for navigation handling. So the emphasis is put on the API,
On 4/9/06, Jacob Hookom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Don Brown wrote:
> > Yeah, I read that post, and while interesting, I'm not sure it would
> > hold much value, particularly for Action 2 applications.
> >
> > Basically, the approach intercepts the usual Faces processing at the
> > start, turning
Sorry, I meant to type Stripes, not Wicket.
Don
Michael Jouravlev wrote:
On 4/9/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
OGNL is used by Action 2/WebWork, Tapestry, Wicket, and several others.
It is the most advanced EL with the most features, however some of those
aren't well documented.
Wi
On 4/9/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OGNL is used by Action 2/WebWork, Tapestry, Wicket, and several others.
> It is the most advanced EL with the most features, however some of those
> aren't well documented.
Wicket guys switched from OGNL to their own implementation, they say
it is
Don Brown wrote:
Yeah, I read that post, and while interesting, I'm not sure it would
hold much value, particularly for Action 2 applications.
Basically, the approach intercepts the usual Faces processing at the
start, turning the lifecycle into one used by Action 1. Action 2,
based on WebWo
on a tangential topic.
Gabe
- Original Message
From: Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Struts Developers List
Sent: Sunday, April 9, 2006 3:07:26 PM
Subject: Re: Fwd: Action/Shale/JSF Overlap? (Was --> RESTful JSF)
Sorry, I should be more clear when discussing EL. An Express
Sorry, I should be more clear when discussing EL. An Expression
Language or EL is a concept I think we all agree is a good thing.
Implementations of EL include JSP 2.0, JSF 1.0, the Unified EL, OGNL,
Jexl, JXPath, and many others. Struts 1.x used a poor man's EL through
Beanutils, which lack
On 4/9/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Using
> EL, on the other hand, I personally don't see as a great benefit. The
> new unified EL lacks many of the key features that makes EL and OGNL in
> particular, so attractive. For example, OGNL supports method
> invocation, type conversion, a
Yeah, I read that post, and while interesting, I'm not sure it would
hold much value, particularly for Action 2 applications.
Basically, the approach intercepts the usual Faces processing at the
start, turning the lifecycle into one used by Action 1. Action 2, based
on WebWork, doesn't have a
[Moving this aspect of the discussion from myfaces to struts list ...]
On 4/7/06, Jacob Hookom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Covered here a bit:
>
> http://weblogs.java.net/blog/jhook/archive/2006/03/the_new_servlet_1.html
@Jacob:
Great blog entry!
@ Struts Dev:
I recommend you check this out.
17 matches
Mail list logo
