For me the biggest shortcoming of JSF is poor support for programmatically (dynamically) generated pages. If you want to construct your page (create page component model) dynamically from java code. For example if you are working on WYSIWYG web page constructor. Adequate documentation of this use case in not generally available. There are many points where you have to experiment and development is quiet slow. Many things just don't work how you would expect. But generally its possible hack it somehow. Good thing is that it's not problem in philosophy or architecture of JSF. It's simply not elaborated enough (as far as I know).

JSF 2带来了组合组件，这将使组件开发变得容易，但是它们对动态(编程式)构造的支持非常差。如果你克服了动态组合组件构造的复杂且几乎没有文档的过程，你会发现如果你把几个组合组件嵌套得稍微深一点，它们就会停止工作，抛出一些异常。

但是JSF社区似乎意识到了这个缺点。你可以从这两个bug中看到，他们正在研究这个 http://java.net/jira/browse/JAVASERVERFACES-1309 http://java.net/jira/browse/JAVASERVERFACES_SPEC_PUBLIC-599

至少在谈论规范时，JSF 2.2的情况会更好。

我想到了一些缺点:

JSF is a component-based framework. This has inherent restrictions that have to do with obeying the component-model. AFAIK JSF supports only POST, so if you want a GET somewhere you have to do a plain servlet/JSP. Most components try to provide abstractions over domains like relational databases and front-end JavaScript, and many time these abstractions are "leaky" and very hard to debug. These abstractions might be a good starting point for a junior developer or someone not comfortable with a particular domain (e.g. front-end JavaScript), but are very hard to optimise for performance, since there are several layers involved, and most people that use them have little understanding of what is going on under the hood. The templating mechanisms that are usually used with JSF have nothing to do with how web desigers work. The WYSIWYG editors for JSF are primitive and in any case, your designer will give you HTML/CSS that you'll have to spend ages converting. Things like EL expressions are not statically checked and both the compiler and IDEs are not doing a good job at finding errors, so you'll end up with errors that you'll have to catch at run-time. This might be fine for dynamically typed language like Ruby or PHP, but if I have to withstand the sheer bloat of the Java ecosystem, I demand typing for my templates.

总而言之:使用JSF节省的时间，从避免编写JSP/servlet/bean样板代码，您将花费10倍的时间来使其可伸缩并完全按照您的要求进行操作。

在所有的“主流”框架中，如Spring MVC、Wicket、Tapestry等，Java EE的JSF及其复合组件是所提供的最精细的表示层和面向组件的技术。与HybridJava提供的解决方案相比，它有点麻烦和不完整。

For me the biggest shortcoming of JSF is poor support for programmatically (dynamically) generated pages. If you want to construct your page (create page component model) dynamically from java code. For example if you are working on WYSIWYG web page constructor. Adequate documentation of this use case in not generally available. There are many points where you have to experiment and development is quiet slow. Many things just don't work how you would expect. But generally its possible hack it somehow. Good thing is that it's not problem in philosophy or architecture of JSF. It's simply not elaborated enough (as far as I know).

JSF 2带来了组合组件，这将使组件开发变得容易，但是它们对动态(编程式)构造的支持非常差。如果你克服了动态组合组件构造的复杂且几乎没有文档的过程，你会发现如果你把几个组合组件嵌套得稍微深一点，它们就会停止工作，抛出一些异常。

但是JSF社区似乎意识到了这个缺点。你可以从这两个bug中看到，他们正在研究这个 http://java.net/jira/browse/JAVASERVERFACES-1309 http://java.net/jira/browse/JAVASERVERFACES_SPEC_PUBLIC-599

至少在谈论规范时，JSF 2.2的情况会更好。

JSF有很多优点，关于缺点的问题，让我再补充一点。

在实现一个web项目的实际场景中，在一个时间框架内，你需要注意以下因素。

你的团队中是否有足够多的资深成员提出最好的建议 适合每个场景的控件? 你有足够的带宽来适应最初的学习曲线吗? 您的团队中是否有足够的专家来审查JSF 开发者制作的东西?

如果你对这些问题的回答是“不”，你可能会在不可维护的代码库中结束。

JSF只有一个缺点:在开始“JSF”开发之前，你应该清楚地了解web开发、核心java和前端架构。

现在“新的”JavaScript框架只是试图复制/粘贴“JSF”基于组件的模型。