Ow, thanks for pointing that out Leo. I'm gonna dive into it. After all, I have to see some proper error messages when Bean validation fails...
/JK 2009/8/10 Leonardo Uribe <[email protected]>: > Hi > > I think the behavior presented is because ExceptionHandler api is not > complete (some exceptions are published but since there is no code that > consume and show this exceptions simply get lost or empty page is shown). > Maybe it could be better to check this fact and complete this point first > before apply other changes on current code. I remember that a temporal > change in some catch of LifecycleImpl to get back the old behavior (throw > instead publish) make the error appear. > > regards > > Leonardo Uribe > > 2009/8/10 Michael Concini <[email protected]> >> >> Jan-Kees van Andel wrote: >>> >>> Sounds like a good idea, if it is not used anymore. >>> >>> The only reference I see, is FaceletViewHandler.NullWriter. >>> JspViewHandlerImpl is only used in tests. (at least, IDEA tells me so) >>> >>> I've commented both classes and the test class, since there can still >>> be some valuable source code in there. Once properly tested, we can >>> easily remove the commented code. I've moved NullWriter to >>> FaceletViewDeclarationLanguage. >>> >>> The only issue I see are people who explicitly specify >>> JSPViewHandlerImpl in their faces-config.xml files, but I don't think >>> many people do that. >>> >>> /JK >>> >>> >> >> Would it be worthwhile to output a warning for any users who are >> explicitly specifying either of the old viewhander classes and deprecate >> them instead of deleting them outright? I know they're internal API but >> they're internal API that someone might have been explicitly specifying, >> even if that group of people is small. Could be a good thing to do, and >> fairly painless for us to ipmplement, to help customers migrating from the >> 1.2 to 2.0 runtime in their apps. >>> >>> 2009/8/10 Simon Lessard <[email protected]>: >>> >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Since it's an internal API I think we should just flush the class down >>>> the >>>> drain. >>>> >>>> >>>> ~ Simon >>>> >>>> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Jan-Kees van Andel >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Removing the <view-handler /> element from my faces-config.xml did the >>>>> trick. >>>>> >>>>> Funny that everything worked properly, except the rerendering. Should >>>>> we add some code to prevent people from making the same mistake? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks Mike, >>>>> JK >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2009/8/10 Michael Concini <[email protected]>: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Jan-Kees van Andel wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The default in the current 2.0 runtime should be using >>>>>>>> org.apache.mfyaces.application.ViewHandlerImpl, which is a single >>>>>>>> class >>>>>>>> implementation for both JSP and facelets. It uses the FactoryFinder >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>> get >>>>>>>> the right ViewDeclarationLanguage implementation depending on >>>>>>>> whether >>>>>>>> you're >>>>>>>> using JSP or facelets since nearly all of the actual work is done in >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> VDL >>>>>>>> classes now. The old JSP and facelets ViewHandler impls shouldn't >>>>>>>> really >>>>>>>> be >>>>>>>> used anymore and as far as I know haven't been updated to the 2.0 >>>>>>>> spec. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm gonna check it tonight (@work now), but the last time I checked, >>>>>>> I >>>>>>> saw the ViewHandlerImpl being returned, but I have to check to be >>>>>>> sure. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But you're saying that specifying the <view-handler /> element in >>>>>>> faces-config.xml is redundant and probably incorect? In that case, >>>>>>> I'm >>>>>>> gonna remove it and check if it works. I've added it a while ago >>>>>>> because I got the JSP ViewHandler back then. Maybe things have >>>>>>> changed >>>>>>> in the meantime. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> That makes sense if you had originally set things up more than a few >>>>>> weeks >>>>>> ago. The new ViewHandlerImpl class was in place but we hadn't changed >>>>>> the >>>>>> default config to use it until sometime in July once most of the VDL >>>>>> impls >>>>>> were ready and we were trying to get some apps working. >>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If you're getting the JSP VDL back from ViewHandlerImpl, then there >>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>> something not configured right either. Maybe in our default config >>>>>>>> files >>>>>>>> or >>>>>>>> the factory definition? >>>>>>>> Let me know if you need me to check into it and I should be able to >>>>>>>> later >>>>>>>> this week. I'm on vacation visiting family right now though so it >>>>>>>> might >>>>>>>> be >>>>>>>> a few days. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks for the offer. I'm gonna debug a bit first, and then I'll come >>>>>>> back to you. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> Jan-Kees >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Sounds good...shoot an email to let me know if you need me to check on >>>>>> it. >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Mike >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> > >
