> Look great to me. I am just wondering how sessionScopeVar is working? Is it 
> like the "var" argument in JSTL? 
> 


Yep, it's like the var.  Maybe it would be better to name it "var" and provide 
a "scope" attribute for request or session.  I went with session to avoid the 
same questions about the updatable dataTables.  

The difference is that the target "sessionScopeVar" object will be a map and 
the keys are generated to match the generated el for the substitution of the 
@managed-bean-name symbol.  This allows the default decoding to work without 
having the responsibility of the dataTable component.

> By the way, what I like about this approach is that we don't have to hide 
> everything behind JSF components. I was wondering why I would need to write
> a list component while in fact a list or a table is just a specific use of a 
> forEach component. It will allow developpers to develop simple components 
> quickly just by reusing basic building blocks :) That was a big weakness of 
> JSF in my mind to always have to write code to develop new components. So 
> great job! I love this feature. 
> 


Cool. These "amalgam" functions are a mix of runtime Clay binding events.  Kind 
of a dynamic flavor of the XML and HTML configs/templates.  


> By the way, maybe you should consider in your design that some more logic 
> components might be add in the future (I don't know how many Tapestry has 
> but it should give us a good estimation). So I guess putting that in 
> ClayAmalgam is fine for the moment but it can become bloated over time. Just 
> my two cents. 
> 

I agree about the bloating of the ClayAmalgam class.  Even if it was organized 
similar to the JSTL libraries (c, fmt, x,..) it would be bloated.  I guess we 
could break each function out into a separate class.   Then we might have 
ClayAmalgamImport, ClayAmalgamOut, ClayAmalgamForEach.  Or, make "ClayAmalgam" 
the managed bean name of a map in application scope that contains Out, Import 
and ForEach entries.  Maybe it will be more clear when we have a few more.


> 
> -- 
> Alexandre Poitras 
> Québec, Canada 
>

Gary

 

Reply via email to