Rhys, I think you hit the nail on the head. You can't get the component during the initial render response phase. The workarounds seem like an awful lot of work for my needs.
-----Original Message----- From: Rhys Parry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 2:40 PM To: MyFaces Discussion Subject: RE: Help me understand component lifecycle please. All, I know I am joining this discussion late, however, I just went through the painful process of writing my own component library because I could not get the components during the render response phase. My idea was that I should be able to get the component id and based on that do some additional security checking. If it fails then set rendered = false. It would be clean. However. . . no go. >>However, it's also possible to configure it by using a binding >>attribute -- you bind the attribute to a backing bean, and then, >>depending on whether you use set or get, you can either modify the >>preconstructed component, or create your own version of the component >>yourself. Did that and it is more work than I had hoped. Also cluttering my code with <sometag value="..." isRendered="{bean.method}"/> and then class SomeBean { public boolean isMethod() { //do some boilerplate stuff } } seems like a lot of replicated redundant code. A thought I had was that it would be nice if we could set up a JSFRenderCallbackHandler. This object would be configured in the faces-config.xml file and would be called during the isRendered phase of the component lifecycle passing in the component as its arg. . . or the id(?). This would remove the boilerplate and not force developers to write a component library. Also a JSFDisabledCallbackHandler would be nice. My 2 cents, Rhys -----Original Message----- From: Neuman, Ben J., A&M IRM [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: April 27, 2006 2:15 PM To: 'MyFaces Discussion' Subject: RE: Help me understand component lilfecycle please. Not sure I understand. Are you referring to the binding of a component's attribute to a backing bean? Or the binding of the component itself to a backing bean? -----Original Message----- From: Mike Kienenberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 12:24 PM To: MyFaces Discussion Subject: Re: Help me understand component lilfecycle please. On 4/27/06, Neuman, Ben J., A&M IRM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Got it. It makes sense to me to "disregard" unrendered components during > phase-processing code. I guess I have issues with the inability to modify > components before the initial rendering. Still feel this is a spec weakness. Well, you "configure" a component by specifying attributes. However, it's also possible to configure it by using a binding attribute -- you bind the attribute to a backing bean, and then, depending on whether you use set or get, you can either modify the preconstructed component, or create your own version of the component yourself. Sorry I didn't point this out earlier as this might be what you wanted.
