How about you, Geert? Which frameworks have you tried and what were
your impressions? Also, which frameworks were you working with before
you decided to create RIFE? What prompted you to embark on this
endeavor?
I started working on RIFE more than 5 years ago. At that point in
time there was
I'll try out the stateful view components.
Frederic
___
Rife-users mailing list
Rife-users@uwyn.com
http://lists.uwyn.com/mailman/listinfo/rife-users
> We'll definitely have to get some drinks together if we ever meet
That would be cool!
How about you, Geert? Which frameworks have you tried and what were
your impressions? Also, which frameworks were you working with before
you decided to create RIFE? What prompted you to embark on this endeav
OK one last thing, Geert is an awesome person and the RIFE
community is
extremely responsive and helpful. Not to be taken for granted!
*blush*
We'll definitely have to get some drinks together if we ever meet :-)
Hope this helps. Feel free to ask for any more precisions
concerning the
fra
I don't understand why they would even ask for an example; it is
not that hard adding state to an embedded element. Anyway, the
truth is, although components
What they were talking about is not to add external state to an
embedded element by for example injecting spring beans or so into it,
> I'd be very interested to get your view on why you prefer to stick
> with RIFE after having tried out all these others. Particularly in
> the light of some comparison evaluations that will be performed by a
> large company next week.
FWIW, I've also tried Tapestry, Wicket, WebWork, JSF, St
On 7 Jun 2006, at 18:22, Geert Bevin wrote:
Wait a minute.. I remember that thread!
So you got ripped by whom, Wicket people? Being flamed by Wicket
people
Yeah, they actually went as far as having me implement an example
of stateful components because they wouldn't believe me. RIFE,
acc
Actually, I tried Wicket a couple of times. It is very similar to
JSF but lacks the low-level features (phase listeners, etc.) that
component developers require. But, as an end-user framework, it
allows one to get the job done quickly.
Now, before the rifers burn me at the stake, the fact t
On 7 Jun 2006, at 18:19, Frederic Daoud wrote:
So, where is that thread on JavaLobby?
It's already quite old:
http://www.javalobby.org/java/forums/t70272.html
Wait a minute.. I remember that thread!
So you got ripped by whom, Wicket people? Being flamed by Wicket
people
is like a cow's o
On 7 Jun 2006, at 18:14, Geert Bevin wrote:
private static final class TasksListTemplate extends
AbstractTemplate {
Very minor comment, it's probably better to implement the Template
interface instead.
To be proper, I should have a base abstract class implementing
Template, then deriv
> I don't. Each decorator applies to a particular use-case; in the
> example, it is the listing of tasks.
OK. I think we are addressing different cases here. In your case, you are
adding functionality to a template by decorating it; in my case, I am defining
a piece of template for reuse. Always
On 7 Jun 2006, at 18:06, Frederic Daoud wrote:
It is simply applying the Decorator design pattern to templates. See
example.
Interesting, interesting..
So you decorate your Template object, but how do you decorate the
HTML template?
Or, put another way, how do you encapsulate how you lay o
> > is like a cow's opinion - it doesn't matter.
>
> Ow. Wicket has got quite some nice ideas and approaches. I think that
> RIFE can still steal some things from them (though not much)
I don't doubt it; I meant that when they start flaming you instead of
having a healthy discussion, or becom
So, where is that thread on JavaLobby?
It's already quite old:
http://www.javalobby.org/java/forums/t70272.html
Wait a minute.. I remember that thread!
So you got ripped by whom, Wicket people? Being flamed by Wicket
people
Yeah, they actually went as far as having me implement an example
> > So, where is that thread on JavaLobby?
>
> It's already quite old:
> http://www.javalobby.org/java/forums/t70272.html
Wait a minute.. I remember that thread!
So you got ripped by whom, Wicket people? Being flamed by Wicket people
is like a cow's opinion - it doesn't matter. :-)
___
private static final class TasksListTemplate extends
AbstractTemplate {
Very minor comment, it's probably better to implement the Template
interface instead.
--
Geert Bevin
Uwyn "Use what you need" - http://uwyn.com
RIFE Java application framework - http://rifers.org
Music and words - http
Hi Geert and Eddy,
> Some people might rip you apart when you call this a component since it
> doesn't handle any encapsulation of state (which is what happened to me
> last time on JavaLobby), but anyway.
Indeed, it's just a "view component", maybe "component" is not the right
word. Sorry you
Which is exactly why I find components cumbersome in most cases. A
component should be relevant on its own, and to do that a developer
would have to consider many different possibilities.
Well that's what I've been trying to solve with embedded elements.
Besides creating reflective datalink
Hi everyone,
I'm working on the next version of RIFE (1.5) which most notably
sports support for site structure declarations using annotations,
stateful view components, simultaneous continuations, step-back
continuations and totally XML-less applications.
As of this weekend however, RIFE
> It is simply applying the Decorator design pattern to templates. See
> example.
Interesting, interesting..
So you decorate your Template object, but how do you decorate the HTML template?
Or, put another way, how do you encapsulate how you lay out the information
"title", "description", etc? D
Geert Bevin wrote:
Hi Frederic,
thanks for sharing this!
Some people might rip you apart when you call this a component since it
doesn't handle any encapsulation of state (which is what happened to me
last time on JavaLobby), but anyway.
Which is exactly why I find components cumbersome in
Hi Frederic,
thanks for sharing this!
Some people might rip you apart when you call this a component since
it doesn't handle any encapsulation of state (which is what happened
to me last time on JavaLobby), but anyway.
It's a nice example of the flexibility of RIFE's template engine though
Frederic Daoud wrote:
Hi Eddy,
Thanks for your response.. a response from "Mr. Component" himself :-)
Unless re-used a lot, components are not worth the effort, IMHO.
I like the approach, although I personally prefer template decorators.
You've got my curiosity; what do you mean by templat
Hi Eddy,
Thanks for your response.. a response from "Mr. Component" himself :-)
> I like the approach, although I personally prefer template decorators.
You've got my curiosity; what do you mean by template decorator?
Could you explain or point me to a document?
Thanks again..
Frederic
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi dear RIFErs,
I've managed to implement a simple component which I call a "view
component", in the sense that it's not really an Element, just a
reusable unit that renders a view from some data. In this case, it's
an HTML table. My goal was to encapsulate how I display
25 matches
Mail list logo
