I agree that they should be on XhtmlRenderer since it's XHTML specific, but
I also agree with Andrew on the static part. There are many methods in
Trinidad that are static for a reason that's oblivious to me and those two
are part of them.
While on the XhtmlRenderer vs CoreRenderer issue, I think we should more
XhtmlRenderer to API even if it's XHTML specific since it's so useful and
since HTML is the most common rendered markup for Trinidad. Also, I'd like
to graduate the findTypeConstants and resolveProperty methods from
XhtmlRenderer to CoreRenderer except that I would remove the boolean flag
from the latter since it's quite useless.
In the future, I think we should make that method as well as PropertyKey
class generic aware.
Regards,
~ Simon
/**
* This method evaluates the property of the specified bean if it supports
* the specified property key and if the current value is
<code>null</code>,
* then evaluate the default value.
* <p>
* If the bean does not support the specified key, this method returns
* <code>null</code>. Unsupported keys occur when the bean's type its type
* returned <code>null</code> from <code>findKey</code> when
* <code>findTypeConstants</code> method was called.
* </p>
*
* @param bean the property value holder.
* @param key the key associated to the property to evaluate.
*
* @return <code>null</code> if key is <code>null</code>, the current
* property value in the bean for the specified key if it was
* set, or the default value if it wasn't.
*
* @see #findTypeConstants(org.apache.myfaces.trinidad.bean.FacesBean.Type
)
*/
protected Object resolveProperty(FacesBean bean, PropertyKey key)
{
if (key == null)
{
return null;
}
Object value = bean.getProperty(key);
if (value == null)
{
value = key.getDefault();
}
return value;
}
On Jan 23, 2008 7:13 PM, Blake Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew Robinson wrote:
> > There are static methods on CoreRenderer that I have no idea why they
> > are static. The two in particular that I noticed:
> >
> > static public void renderStyleClass
> > static public void renderStyleClasses
> >
> > These are methods for renderers, why would they be static?
> >
> > There are some util style classes that are calling them, because of
> > this, I would think these methods should be moved into a Util class
> > and have the Renderer methods invoke the Util ones. IMO, static
> > utility functions do not belong on classes that are meant to be
> > extended. Do others agree, or am I solo on this opinion?
> Andrew, isn't the real problem here that these methods should be on
> XhtmlRenderer or XhtmlUtils as their implementations are
> Xhtml-specific. I don't have a problem per se with static methods on
> extendable classes. However, if the class is going to contain
> extractable static convenience functions, then it is confusing to have
> both the class itself and a separate Utils class. Given that we have a
> separate Utils class, these methods shouldn't be on the abstract class.
>
> -- Blake Sullivan
> >
> > -Andrew
>
>
