---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sep 1, 2005 5:43 PM
Subject: Re: best way to initialize BackingBean?
To: Mike Kienenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I am talking about exactly the same thing you are talking about.
With a caveat - you can't use value bindings there right now, just
strings are possible. Ideally, you would take the code where it ends
end bring it a little further ;)
regards,
Martin
On 9/1/05, Mike Kienenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Martin,
>
> Are you talking about setting parameters at run-time via f:param?
>
> We're talking about setting them at config-time via managed properties.
>
> Like this:
>
>
> <converter>
> <converter-for-class>myClass</converter-for-class>
> <converter-class>myConverterClass</converter-class>
> <managed-property>
> <property-name>myManagedBean</property-name>
> <value>#{myManagedBeanName}</value>
> </managed-property>
> </converter>
>
>
> On 8/31/05, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hint, hint taken ;)
> >
> > MyFaces does that. It is in the appendix of the spec, and MyFaces (at
> > least partially - as much as was needed of that by me) supports
> > setting parameters onto Converters...
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > Martin
> >
> > On 8/31/05, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 8/31/05, Mike Kienenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > On 8/31/05, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > If you are using by-Class converters, you don't need to register them
> > > on
> > > > > the *component* at all -- they get registered in the Application
> > > instance
> > > > > along with the class they are for. I'm not sure I see a need to use a
> > > DI
> > > > > framework to instantiate those, since you already have the ability to
> > > > > configure the implementation class that will be used.
> > > >
> > > > Craig,
> > > >
> > > > Can you expand on this? What do I need to do to gain the ability to
> > > > configure the implementation class?
> > >
> > > Simply include a registration for the converter in one of your
> > > faces-config.xml files. The following entry will override the standard
> > > converer that is applied to any property of type Integer:
> > >
> > > <converter>
> > > <converter-for-class>java.lang.Integer</converter-for-class>
> > >
> > > <converter-class>com.mycompany.MyIntegerConverter</converter-class>
> > > </converter>
> > >
> > > Your config files are read *after* the JSF implementation has been
> > > configured, so this *replaces* the standard one.
> > >
> > > > I have lots of converters registered by class, and I want to DI a
> > > > managed JSF bean into each of them. How do I do this?
> > >
> > > In other words, you want to use DI for configuring properties on a
> > > by-class
> > > converter? That, sadly, isn't supported unless you were to override the
> > > Application instance provided by your JSF impementation (or if your JSF
> > > implementation provided this feature as part of its own implementation,
> > > hint
> > > hint :-). The technique I described doesn't reference any by-id or
> > > by-type
> > > registered converters ... it creates anonymous instances.
> > >
> > > But you don't *need* to use DI for this if your MyIntegerConverter class
> > > (see previous example) is already set up exactly the way you want it after
> > > the public zero-args constructor returns. All you need for that is the
> > > registration described above.
> > >
> > > > -Mike
> > > >
> > >
> > > Craig
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > http://www.irian.at
> > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > JSF Trainings in English and German
> >
>
>
--
http://www.irian.at
Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Trainings in English and German
--
http://www.irian.at
Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Trainings in English and German
