Usually I would completely agree, but in this case it may be valid. The
encodeEnd/Begin methods that don't use the FacesBean are setup in such a way
to use either encodeAll or encodeEnd (with the FacesBean). So I really don't
think people should be extending these methods.
On Jan 22, 2008 3:27 PM, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> what is the reason of having encodeEnd and encodeBegin final?
>
> I have never understood why Trinidad is trying to hide possibilities from
> the developer. Isn't it safe enough to say that renderers are not part of
> the API, what you are doing there, might break with an update. Instead,
> everyone is forced by this into "compliance mode"... how strange.
>
> regards,
>
> Martin
>
>
> On Jan 22, 2008 10:24 PM, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > In the development of a library based on Trinidad, I need to have some
> > hooks in the renderer to improve performance. Specifically, I need to setup
> > a context and strip down a context for a component. Right now,
> > CoreRenderer.encodeEnd (FacesContext, UIComponent) is final, so I cannot
> > extend that method and the methods it calls I cannot reliably use (see
> > below).
> >
> > What I propose is:
> >
> > new methods on CoreRenderer:
> > protected void startComponent(FacesContext context, RenderingContext
> > context, UIComponent component, FacesBean bean) {}
> > protected void endComponent(FacesContext context, RenderingContext
> > context, UIComponent component, FacesBean bean) {}
> >
> > These methods would be invoked from within
> > "CoreRenderer.encodeBegin(FacesContext,
> > UIComponent)" and " CoreRenderer.encodeEnd(FacesContext, UIComponent)"
> > respectively.
> >
> > The benefit is that someone creating a component framework on top or
> > Trinidad can extend the ability to setup and tear down settings when a
> > component is being rendered. In my case, I need to extend the skinning code
> > in a framework to enable certain functionality on a per-component basis from
> > within the skin and have this functionality global to all our renderers.
> >
> > You may ask "why not just extend encodeAll?". Well the problem is that I
> > have no idea when the child class will call this. For example:
> >
> > protected void encodeAll(FacesContext context, RenderingContext arc,
> > UIComponent component, FacesBean bean) throws IOException
> > {
> > ... code
> > super.encodeAll(context, arc, component, bean);
> > ... code
> > }
> >
> > As you can see, encodeAll doesn't give me the ability to have a hook
> > from the renderer class level for when the component starts and ends. It
> > doesn't make good OO code to have to manually code it in every one of our
> > renderers.
> >
> > I also see the reason in having the methods final, so would prefer the
> > hooks over removing the final keywords from encodeBegin and encodeEnd.
> >
> > Any objections to adding these 2 methods/hooks?
> >
> > If ppl. don't mind to respond quickly, I'll make the change if I get
> > some quick positive feedback and no negative feedback. This is a fairly high
> > priority feature that I need this for and cannot afford the 3 day vote
> > period.
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Andrew
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> http://www.irian.at
>
> Your JSF powerhouse -
> JSF Consulting, Development and
> Courses in English and German
>
> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
