On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 11:00 PM, Simon Lessard <simon.lessar...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Michael, > > Definitely 3. It's true that JSF 2.0's ViewHandler no longer do much, it > pretty much only deal with HTTP headers and such while most of the work is > delegated to the VDL. 2 might break the TCK I think so it's not a good > option.
yeah, I agree. The third option (AbstractViewHandler) is a good choice! -Matthias > > ~ Simon > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Michael Concini <mconc...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I'm currently looking at updating JspViewhandlerImpl and >> FaceletViewHandlerImpl for MYFACES-2219. As I'm looking at this, it seems >> that many/most of the methods that need to be implemented or updated will be >> identical for both JSP and Facelet. >> I see three potential ways of handling this: >> 1) Have lots of duplicate code in both impl classes. 2) Implement in the >> API.where possible >> 3) Create an abstract parent class that extends ViewHandler for the impl >> classes to extend from. >> The first option is not ideal for obvious reasons. With respect to the >> second option, the JSF spec already forces a lot of implementing in the API. >> I'd rather not add more if possible since its really not the place for it. >> My preference would be for the third option. I could push the ViewHandler >> method impls common to both Facelet and JSP to a new class (maybe >> org.apache.myfaces.application.AbstractViewHandler) and then implement the >> method which are different for each in the JSP and Facelet impls >> respectively. >> Thanks for you input, >> Mike > > -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
