On Jan 30, 2008 1:59 PM, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Mario, > > your second suggestion sounds viable for me - not for the API > components, as those cannot change their inheritance, but for the > tomahawk and MyFaces impl components, this should be doable (and a > very good idea) indeed. > > @why Trinidad doesn't work with annotations: how would you then > generate restoreState and saveState? And the getters? You don't want > to write all the getters by hand, do you? >
tobago is using @nnotations for generation (of config) don't know 100% > regards, > > Martin > > > On 1/30/08, Mario Ivankovits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Matthias, > > > yep. > > > -xml configuration == "mini faces-config files" > > > -templates == in order to "override" some *defaults* (like when you > > > want to do something "special" inside the validate() for InputFile, > > > provide a template, which is a real Java class) > > > -it generates the real UIComponent java file as well > > > -generates facelets XML taglib file > > > > > Is it possible to use the plugin in a way where the component/renderer > > gets not generated, only the tagblib and config stuff? > > > > I think this is the way to go for now. I know, then the developer has to > > ensure that the types of the setter on the UIComponent do not differ to > > the property. > > Another short term solution could be to just create an abstract basis > > class with the setter/getter stuff but leave the real logic of the > > component out of it. The developer then has to inherit from this class > > the real component. > > > > > > Ciao, > > Mario > > > > > > > -- > > http://www.irian.at > > Your JSF powerhouse - > JSF Consulting, Development and > Courses in English and German > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
