Hi Jan-Kees, for now, our last ressort ist code duplication. For the future, you should file an issue against the spec, I would say.
regards, Martin On 10/25/09, Jan-Kees van Andel <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey (CC MyFaces Dev), > > For MyFaces, I have implemented the first version of Bean Validation > support. But my implementation had a TCK issue, because I had some > non-specified public fields. These fields indicated the runtime > availability of some libraries. > See: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-2386 for the issue. > > To fix it, I've moved the public fields to a separate, package-private > class (still in the API), to hide them from end users and fix TCK > issues. > But the problem with this solution is that the fields are used in more > than one package (currently "validate" and "component". Probably more > to come), giving me only one option: Code duplication. > > I personally hate code duplication, which leads me to the question: Is > it a good idea to put an API in the spec which contains the > information I'm providing in my current class? > > Initially I wrote this message because I hate code duplication, but > there might be another benefit, since 3th party libraries may also > want to check the existence of certain libraries. Especially Bean > Validation and Web Beans may have impact on framework/component > authors. I think some API like this is quite important, because JSF > (since 2.0) doesn't live on its own anymore, but interacts with other > libraries as well. > > My implementation > (http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/myfaces/core/trunk/api/src/main/java/javax/faces/validator/_ExternalSpecifications.java?revision=829526&view=markup) > currently works for MyFaces, but the official API may need to be a bit > more reusable/extensible. > I was thinking of something simple: > public interface FacesEnvironment /* This name probably sucks */ { > public boolean isBeanValidationAvailable(); > public boolean isUnifiedELAvailable(); > // ... > } > > An interface might be overkill, but the EG may work out the details. ;-) > > What do you guys think? Useful addition for "JSF 2.1"? > > Regards, > Jan-Kees van Andel > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
