Re: [faces-dev] Deprecate or remove implicit implicit object el resolver

[Thomas Andraschko <andraschko.thomas@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Arjan,

i'm ok to make the CDI thing always active BUT not to make it mandatory in the specs for each "artifact" (like "facesContext" or "externalContext").

In MyFaces, we use CDI for every artifact, just not for "cc" and "component" for performance reasons.

All other artifacts are at least FacesScoped/RequestScoped or even a longer scope.
The only 2 artifacts which would use @Dependent are "cc" and "component".
As we can't @Inject it and it doesn't make sense to introduce a CDI @ComponentScope, its better to use a ImplicitObject for this 2 artifacts.

Best regards,

Thomas

Am Mi., 4. Nov. 2020 um 23:26 Uhr schrieb arjan tijms <arjan.tijms@xxxxxxxxx>:

Hi,

In Faces 2.3 we added the CDI resolver for resolving all so-called implicit objects in _expression_ language in Faces.

This was added as a full replacement for the existing ImplicitObjectELResolverForJSP and ImplicitObjectELResolverForFaces. The first one will be removed as JSP is being removed, the second one is specified here: https://jakarta.ee/specifications/faces/3.0/jakarta-faces-3.0#a2830

As per the spec, these are only used when Faces is in the "fake 2.2" mode (which we gave a sweet name by saying "no FacesConfig is present")

In 2.3+ mode the CDI based EL resolver is always used. Now as we're removing the "fake 2.2" mode, this also implicitly means removing this ImplicitObjectELResolverForFaces (it would never be activated then).

What does everyone think, should we remove it, based on that the spec already states it's not present when in 2.3+ mode, or do we explicitly deprecate it first before removing it? (but then the question comes up, how would a user still activate it)

Thoughts?

Kind regards,

Arjan Tijms

_______________________________________________
faces-dev mailing list
faces-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/faces-dev