RE: [Springframework-developer] RE: [Springframework-user] chain ViewResolvers?

[Alef A. <al...@jt...>]

> Just catching up on the discussion (the problem of living so far away =
is
> that my day is your night :).
Hmmm, must have pressed the wrong button, accidentally moving the =
discussion
to the dev list...

> I'm curious why you think a ChainedViewResolver would be inconsistent.
> I view it as a new feature, not as breaking a pattern.  It certainly
> seems the most simple (maintains 1 viewresolver for the servlet, =
allows
> for explicit ordering by definition of the chain, doesn't change any
> semantics on return variables, etc).  Also, we can always add
> ChainedHandlerMapping.
Hmmm, just an opinion I guess. Defining a chain in a ChainedViewResolver =
or
ChainedHandlerMapping doesn't have any real value over the definition of
such HandlerMappings and ViewResolvers directly, Ordering is already
possible, etcetera. I think all of us aren't really fond of providing =
stuff
that doesn't have any added value.

The main reason why J=FCrgen proposed the ChainedViewResolver was =
basically to
maintain backward-compatibility, but that's been fixed now. You can =
tweak
the DispatcherServlet with a property enabling or disabling multiple
viewresolvers.

I saw you figured out the ordering already?

Alef