Backing beans can contain converters, but that is just an additional aspect of the Backing Bean.
Documentation is unclear, but I'm pretty sure that when a Backing Bean implements Converter, it's intended to make the backing bean as a whole self-converting. In other words, if BeanX implements Converter, I don't expect the conversion methods to be receiving/emitting anything that isn't a BeanX.
Experience keeps a dear School, but Fools will learn in no other.
---
Benjamin Franklin - Postal official and Weather observer
Tim Holloway wrote:Backing beans can contain converters, but that is just an additional aspect of the Backing Bean.
Documentation is unclear, but I'm pretty sure that when a Backing Bean implements Converter, it's intended to make the backing bean as a whole self-converting. In other words, if BeanX implements Converter, I don't expect the conversion methods to be receiving/emitting anything that isn't a BeanX.
You are right! That´s why my bean doesn´t implement Converter!! My Generic (BaseConverter) does!!
Tim Holloway wrote:Backing beans can contain converters, but that is just an additional aspect of the Backing Bean.
Documentation is unclear, but I'm pretty sure that when a Backing Bean implements Converter, it's intended to make the backing bean as a whole self-converting. In other words, if BeanX implements Converter, I don't expect the conversion methods to be receiving/emitting anything that isn't a BeanX.
You are right! That´s why my bean doesn´t implement Converter!! My Generic (BaseConverter) does!!
What's the advantage of a design like this? At first glance I would much rather have a separate, dedicated converter class that works on a specific type.