Dan,
I really like the both approaches and I think method is appropriate
for the specific use case the only thing is if all that runtime
selection stuff happen per request, wouldn't that be a performance
killer? I know the those call times are minuscule, but if that would
become a pattern for the rest of the framework, those numbers could
really add up.
Now why would someone really mix Wicket and JSF together in a single
app? In addition, if you do want to allow that runtime selection and
allow users to mix and match different view frameworks at runtime,
then you need to think about a page that has both JSF and Wicket
elements on it, for example a portal style app. Then you really need
to think about who consumes what/when.
cheers,
Drew Kutcharian
Chief Technology Officer
Venarc Inc.
Regarding the discussion of the design for StatusMessages...
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 7:59 AM, Clint Popetz <cpopetz(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
I want to
point out that using a deployment type and @Specializes would seem to
place us in the same situation as Seam 2.x with respect to the view
layers co-existing in the same deployment, which
https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBSEAM-3645 was meant to address.
In other words, I'd rather that the choice of the StatusMessages bean
that will be activated isn't based on deployment type, but rather is
chosen at runtime based on the type of request, using the pattern in
the patch for the above jira issue. Deployment types would of course
still be used to choose which implementations of things like
StatusMessages are available.
I have taken a first stab at solving this problem. I'm open to other
approaches, but first let me explain what I've done. As Clint points
out, from one request to the next, you may be dealing with different
frameworks (Wicket vs JSF for instance). But within the request, you
want to be able to take specific actions relating to the current
framework. Clearly, this is not the appropriate scenario for a
deployment type since that is design for a setting/environment that
is fixed. So I did some brainstorming.
What I realized is that StatusMessages are really a generic
repository that should be updated and consumed by the framework-
specific activity. Therefore, it seems to me like there should be
one and only one conversation-scoped StatusMessages. Then, if you
want to have some extra methods for convenience (for instance in JSF
to add a StatusMessage from an existing FacesMessage) you create a
class which extends and wraps the StatusMessages component
(StatusMessages would be injected into it and all overrides
delegating to it). You could also override the onBeforeRender()
method where you might put the logic for converting and transfering
to the native message type and storage. The executor of that
conversion would be implemented in the framework-specific listener.
For instance, 9 out of 10 times you simply inject the StatusMessages
to use in your application:
@Current StatusMessages statusMessages;
For JSF, there is a FacesMessages bean which inherits from
StatusMessages (to keep the API the same) and delegates calls to the
StatusMessages instance. It also adds the logic to create
FacesMessage objects in the onBeforeRender() method
public void onBeforeRender() {
super.onBeforeRender();
// create FacesMessage objects and register them here
}
The ConvertStatusMessagesListener (a JSF system event listener)
executes the onBeforeRender() call.
manager.getInstanceByType(StatusMessages.class, new
AnnotationLiteral<Faces>() {}).onBeforeRender();
There are also some convenience methods on the FacesMessages
instance. If you want to use them, you inject as follows:
@Faces FacesMessages facesMessages;
I can't use @Current here because otherwise the resolution would be
ambigous. I could just clone the StatusMessages API in the
FacesMessages class to avoid having to use this binding type, so if
you have a feeling/advice there, I would be glad to here it.
Okay, that's one approach. Now for something different. There is a
similar specialization w/ the Expressions class (an EL convenience
API). If working within the JSF request, we want to override some
methods so that the bean uses the current JSF EL context. In this
case, I decided to try Clint's approach described in the cited issue
report. A producer method will locate beans that have the binding
type @RuntimeSelected and will consult the isActive() method to
determine which one is prepared to handle the current request. The
isActive() method comes from the RuntimeSelectedBean interface. So
the bean must have both the binding type and the interface. There is
a second binding type, @Default, which indicates which
implementation should be used when there are no @RuntimeSelected
implementations present or active. It is mutually exclusive with
@RuntimeSelected.
So you have:
public @Default class Expressions { ... }
public @RuntimeSelected class FacesExpressions extends Expressions,
RuntimeSelectedBean {
public boolean isActive()
{
return FacesContext.getCurrentInstance() != null;
}
}
public @RuntimeSelected class WicketExpressions extends Expressions,
RuntimeSelectedBean {
public boolean isActive()
{
return Application.exists();
}
}
The producer type for the Expressions bean is application-scoped and
the producer method is dependent-scoped (or request-scoped?). The
available instances are looked up when the producer is initialized
and the instance is selected from this set each time the producer is
resolved.
Of course, I could have used this strategy for the StatusMessages
too, except in the case of StatusMessages it is logical to use the
shared/generic StatusMessages bean. It's only when you need to
convert the messages do you need the specialization and therefore I
think we can avoid having to do the runtime selection.
I've committed all of this to the Seam trunk if you want to check it
out. I'm open to suggestions...I'm just trying to get used WB and
find a workable approach. The solutions we decide on are important
because the define a standard practice we will follow as more cases
arise.
-Dan
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Dan
NOTE: While I make a strong effort to keep up with my email on a daily
basis, personal or other work matters can sometimes keep me away
from my email. If you contact me, but don't hear back for more than
a week,
it is very likely that I am excessively backlogged or the message was
caught in the spam filters. Please don't hesitate to resend a
message if
you feel that it did not reach my attention.
_______________________________________________
seam-dev mailing list
seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev