Hi,
Why not use the protected getter/setter for the properties you do not
want in the web area? If the get/set method is protected it can still be
accesed if inherited but is not available elsewere.
I think that the <managed-property> is JSF RI.
BR,
Alecs
On Tue, 2006-05-30 at 12:15 +0200, Ondrej Svetlik wrote:
> Wolf Benz wrote:
> > Thanks but... this is what I knew so far :-)
> > What I want is not sharing an ENTIRE bean, just ONE variable. (a
> > managed property)
> > Is this possible as well?
> >
> > Thought of these 2 possibilities: (donno whether it would work/ whether
> > at least one of them is correct)
> >
> > <managed-bean>
> > <managed-bean-name>A</managed-bean-name>
> > <managed-bean-class>...</managed-bean-class>
> > <managed-bean-scope>session</managed-bean-scope>
> > </managed-bean>
> > <managed-bean>
> > <managed-bean-name>B</managed-bean-name>
> > <managed-bean-class>...</managed-bean-class>
> > <managed-bean-scope>session</managed-bean-scope>
> > <managed-property>
> > <property-name>beanB_varA</property-name> <!-- Name of the
> > very same var in bean B-->
> > <value>#{beanA.varA}</value> <!-- referencing this way
> > allowed?-->
> > </managed-property>
> > </managed-bean>
> >
>
> Hello Wolf,
>
> I thing the first method should work, but! This will almost sure set the
> property while instantiating the session bean. It means that those beans
> will share one instance. When you use still the same instance it will be
> all right. When you change the instance in A it won't be shared with B
> any more. B will still have the old instance. That's my opinion.
>
> This would mean that sharing int, boolean or other scalar type variables
> would never work this way.
>
> Best regards
>
> Ondrej Svetlik
