On 3/29/06, Werner Punz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Craig McClanahan schrieb: > > > I was constrained in the stuff so far by what could be accomplished at > > runtime -- and there's no way to define a tag library "on the fly" at > > that point. But what you're describing could certainly be done by > > processing annotations at compile time instead (using "apt" or > > equivalent). That'd be an interesting area to explore, over and above > > the runtime stuff. > > > Yes I was talking exactly the same issue over with Mario, definitely an > area which as to be explored for the next JSP version, but for now > having artefact codegens, via apt (probably a viable choice since it > will be in 1.6 officially anyway) or via xdoclet2 and or velocity would > be a good idea. The main point is just to have something which cuts down > on the number of manual maintain artefacts. If there are codegen > artefacts does not really matter.
Code-gen'd artifacts *do* matter, because they contribute to the rebuild, redeploy mess that we're in now. No codegen'd artifact is better than the absence of that artifact in the first place. Not that I'm against codegen - the ADF Faces code uses it extensively - one source of metadata is used to generate the component class, faces-config, the JSP tag, the TLD, the facelets taglib, and our docs. -- Adam
