Andrew Robinson said the following On 4/15/2008 1:42 PM PT:
I am agreement with the others that would like to see case by case
JIRA issues to choose to open up renderers since it is considered
taboo (spelling it right this time).
Or, more specifically, that subclassing the current Renderers is
unsupported (Trinidad consumers are free to do anything that they want
with any of the code as per Apache license) and the reason why it is
currently unsupported is that the current implementation's Renderer
inheritance hierarchy, delegation model, and protected hooks aren't
really designed for anything other than the convenience of the
implementors and thus, largely currently exist at the whim of the
implementors. As a practical matter, most of these aspects of the
Renderer implementation haven't changed in a long time and so
subclassing, though unsafe can work but is very much "at your own risk"
and even then can be painful.
In cases where we aren't essentially adding new public api (like public
skinning hooks) and are requesting that an Renderer be opened up with
more protected hooks, the removal of finals, or a mroe fundamental
redesign. I would like to see what the guaranteed lifetime for these
changes is.
-- Blake Sullivan
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 2:40 PM, Cristi Toth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi guys,
Dividing this thread is the best thing.
But I think we either reached a conclusion or we should start a vote about
final/private methods
We can change current final/private renderer methods to not final /
protected ones,
only when needed, on specific use cases !!!
If somebody still disagrees with the previous conclusion, the we should
start a vote.
If not, we should take this as a fact from now on.
After we reach a conclusion on the other thread (sub-renderers),
we should have a wiki page or a documentation page on extending Trinidad
renderers.
Thanks for the extensive feedback (positive and negative)!
Best regards,
--
Cristi Toth
-------------
Codebeat
www.codebeat.ro
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 9:38 PM, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thanks. I think that would be best. :)
Andrew Robinson wrote:
I'll start a new thread though to clean up the email mess
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 12:37 PM, Andrew Robinson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There is already code in:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/myfaces/trinidad/branches/ar_subRendererPerfTesting
As for JIRA, I don't feel that that is a place for discussions. If a
decision is made, then I will create an issue.
-Andrew
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 12:30 PM, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Perhaps you should file a JIRA ticket and give us a prototype so
that we can
> discuss a more concrete example.
>
> Scott
>
>
>
> Andrew Robinson wrote:
>
> > I agree partially with ending this thread, but not 100%. The
thread
> > still lives on as a discussion to see if having sub-renderers
> > instantiated via the renderkit using renderer types is a desired
> > improvement to the core renderers. If it is, there is an open
> > discussion that Simon has addressed on how to customize the value
of
> > properties that a renderer uses from the FacesBean without using
> > inheritance.
> >
> > Tthat part of the thread has not reached a resolution, and
although it
> > may be viewed as a sub-thread, it still warrants further
discussion
> > and other view points.
> >
> > -Andrew
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 12:19 PM, Matthias Wessendorf
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 8:11 PM, Andy Schwartz
> > >
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Ravi, All -
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 11:01 AM, Ravindra Adireddy
> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > Extending complex trinidad components like table,
treeTable is
> complex job
> > > > > due to final, private and default access modifier methods
in
> components
> > > > > renderer and components class.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I am thinking that it is perhaps time to put this thread to
rest.
> > > > (It's been fun, but, hey, all good things come to an end,
right?)
> > >
> > > seriously, I agree on that
> > >
> > > -M
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Perhaps we should follow Stephen's lead and start opening
up new
> > > > threads to discuss particular cases where improved
extensibility is
> > > > required.
> > > >
> > > > Ravi - would you mind starting a new thread to address the
table
> > > > extensibility question?
> > > >
> > > > Andy
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > >
> > > further stuff:
> > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> > > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> > > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
