Does anyone know if there is a recommended way to have a bean method
executed before a JSF page is loaded? For example, I have a page with a
h:dataTable in it. What I want to do is make it so that when a user brings
up the page directly (by entering the URL in the browser text box rather
than a
> -Original Message-
> From: Jonathan Eric Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: How to execute bean method before JSF page is loaded?
> Does anyone know if there is a recommended way to have a bean
> method executed before a JSF page is loaded? For example, I
>
The pattern I have been using for this sort of thing it to have the
value accessor in the bean check to see if the data has been retrieved
and, if not, sets the value up. E.g.,
public class SomeBean {
private Object value = null;
public Object getValue() {
if (value == null) {
//
adbois [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, March 11, 2005 3:31 PM
> To: MyFaces Discussion
> Subject: Re: How to execute bean method before JSF page is loaded?
>
> The pattern I have been using for this sort of thing it to
> have the value accessor in the bean check to see if
s as well.
>
> Kalle
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: David Gadbois [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Friday, March 11, 2005 3:31 PM
> > To: MyFaces Discussion
> > Subject: Re: How to execute bean method before JSF page is loaded?
> >
> &g
al Message -
From: "Korhonen, Kalle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "MyFaces Discussion"
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2005 5:06 PM
Subject: RE: How to execute bean method before JSF page is loaded?
-Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Eric Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
S
tically if bean so wished (i.e. implements the interface). The
same approach could be used for a lot of other cases as well.
Kalle
-Original Message-
From: David Gadbois [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2005 3:31 PM
To: MyFaces Discussion
Subject: Re: How to execute bean me
be used for a lot of other cases as well.
> >>
> >>Kalle
> >>
> >>
> >>>-Original Message-
> >>>From: David Gadbois [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>Sent: Friday, March 11, 2005 3:31 PM
> >>>To: MyFaces Disc
Formally, a managed bean has the following characteristics:
* Registered in a faces-config.xml file (not web.xml :-)
* Public class with a public zero-args constructor (i.e. a JavaBean)
When a value binding or method binding expression is evaluated, the
various scopes (request, session, applicat
> * Store the new instance in the specified scope (unless you
> set it to "none", which means a new instance will be created
> for every expression evaluation.
I don't think I knew about the "none" scope. Learn something new every day.
> Craig
sean
Craig/Anyone:
I realize this is off topic (and off list for that
matter), but, how is Shale coming along? Is it ready
for an Alpha release any time soon?
Thanks,
Ray
--- Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Formally, a managed bean has the following
> characteristics:
>
> * Registered
Shale is definitely not off-topic IMO. I think MyFaces and Shale go
very nicely together. Plus every time you say the word "Shale" Craig
pops up here ;-) This is a cheap way to get him to answer our JSF
questions.
I suspect a lot us are going to be using Shale soon (I am about to use
it in a li
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 23:00:10 -0500, Sean Schofield
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Shale is definitely not off-topic IMO. I think MyFaces and Shale go
> very nicely together. Plus every time you say the word "Shale" Craig
> pops up here ;-) This is a cheap way to get him to answer our JSF
> questio
Craig,
Some other thoughts:
* At TSSJS, I talked with folks on the Spring and Beehive projects. Both
of them have abstractions to do what DialogController is focused on, and
I want to experiment with both of them for this responsibility, to see if we
can avoid having to reinvent that partic
> At best we could do some sort of milestone release, but I don't want
> to create any impressions that the API is close to being frozen yet
> (although ViewController seems pretty solid). But the best way to
> make the APIs solid is to get some real world feedback, so it may be
> that milestones
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 13:43:08 +0100, Matthias Wessendorf
[snip]
> Fine! Working together should be the best JSF user could get,
> independent from which Impl of JSF Spec they might use.
>
Absolutely.
> It is very important, that Shale works with MyFaces
> (it does, I am "playing" with both dur
Craig McClanahan wrote:
<>
Some other thoughts:
* At TSSJS, I talked with folks on the Spring and Beehive projects. Both
of them have abstractions to do what DialogController is focused on, and
I want to experiment with both of them for this responsibility, to see if we
can avoid having to rei
This begs the question of why MyFaces components aren't a project of
their own. An FAQ on this mailing list is whether the MyFaces
components will work with the RI, so there's some confusion as to why
MyFaces has components that aren't MyFaces-specific.
Perhaps Shale should absorb the MyFaces c
David,
I am just about to answer Craig regarding his post...
But you said it very very clear to something I just thought...
So here is my post...
Take a look at Apache Portals, that is something I have in mind on *long
term*
There could be a similar Toplevel Project btw. name it "Apache Faces".
O
It would be great to have one-stop shopping of sorts for Apache
projects related to JSF. I like grouping JSF-related projects and
decoupling unrelated pieces at the same time. Apache Portals looks like
a good candidate to emulate.
david
Le Mar 15, 2005, à 1:55 PM, Matthias Wessendorf a écrit :
+1
After all Shale is a JSF project along with MyFaces.
So organizing them in one place and making it so that
people can plug and play what they want sounds ideal.
--- David Geary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It would be great to have one-stop shopping of sorts
> for Apache
> projects related
Its an interesting idea. There are a lot of details to work out but
it might not be a bad idea to start discussions about something like
this.
I'm not sure I would agree that the MyFaces components belong in
Shale. At the moment there seems to be three distinct projects:
myfaces (jsf api + impl)
Its an interesting idea. There are a lot of details to work out but
it might not be a bad idea to start discussions about something like
this.
Nice to hear that some of you like the *idea*. It was just only a idea
for now and yes there must be provided more to be concret on something
like that. S
Personally, I'm not convinced that Shale really should be part of the
MyFaces project. If you look at JSF as a foundation for UI frameworks (and
more sophisticated web frameworks in general), then hopefully we'll see it
pop up in lots of different places (in my perfect world, even Tapestry
woul
Kito-
I haven't said that Shale should be integrated into MyFaces
or a subproject of MyFaces.
I was talking about a *generell* JavaServer Faces Project
under the umbrella of Apache Software Foundation.
Called "Apache Faces" or something similar to that.
(like "Apache Portals" is for the Portlet-API
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:46:58 -0500, Kito D. Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Personally, I'm not convinced that Shale really should be part of the
> MyFaces project. If you look at JSF as a foundation for UI frameworks (and
> more sophisticated web frameworks in general), then hopefully we'll see
I am replying to several postings on the mailing list in the last time
at once, so sorry if I puzzle someone.
With all this discussion on toplevel or sublevel or whatever level
projects we should still try to get our infrastructure up-to-date
first (I agree with Matthias and his former postings on
I agree 100% with Martin on this one.
On one of these threads Kito made a comment about people being
confused about the myfaces components and whether or not they require
myfaces. We should do our best to promote the fact that the
components are independent of the implementation. Improvements t
Also a FAQ was added recently answering to this question, but we
should made the issue more visible as Sean points out,
Bruno
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:30:15 -0500, Sean Schofield
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree 100% with Martin on this one.
>
> On one of these threads Kito made a comment abo
I prefer Matthias' proposal for Apache Faces. I think it'd be great to
have all JSF-related technologies in one project.
As for the Faces components, as long as they're MyFaces components,
people will be confused about using them standalone. We can add
documentation, but people will still be co
> I prefer Matthias' proposal for Apache Faces. I think it'd be great to
> have all JSF-related technologies in one project.
Yes. This is a good idea if we can get buy in from Shale folks, etc.
> As for the Faces components, as long as they're MyFaces components,
> people will be confused about
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:38:02 -0500, Sean Schofield
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I prefer Matthias' proposal for Apache Faces. I think it'd be great to
> > have all JSF-related technologies in one project.
>
> Yes. This is a good idea if we can get buy in from Shale folks, etc.
>
Shale is an a
> Shale is an accepted Struts sub-project (a project that is focused on
> providing a web MVC framework). If I get my way (in the long term),
> it will become the next generation of Struts. If its clear that this
> won't happen, only then is it reasonable to think about alternative
> homes.
I am
33 matches
Mail list logo
