I really don't care for the word beans. They just smack of bad OO to me, same with transfer objects. Throw beans away, focus on domains and what they should DO. Sure maybe it's symantics but I think beans have this context about them of just being glorified structures. If you find yourself writing more .getXXX or .setXXX then anything else then something is either modeled poorly or you are trying to shoe horn something into an OO design that simply does not fit. Is this a bad thing? I suppose it depends on what type of app you are writing. In general Services should just know how to co-ordinate different parts of the model Asking the model to do the necessary tasks to accomplish larger tasks. Sometimes that might result in data passing in or coming out but generally the service should focus on behavior of individual domain objects.
Adam On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 4:44 AM, Alan Livie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > Fat beans - thin(ish) services. > > Alan > ________________________________________ > From: [email protected] [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Henry > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 28 August 2008 04:01 > To: CFCDev > Subject: [CFCDEV] fat bean vs fat service? > > I wonder what's prefered... should the bean methods work with > properties of a bean, or should the service methods do everything to a > bean, by calling all the getters and setters? > > What do you use? > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CFCDev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfcdev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
