Since there already has been a lengthy discussion, is anyone interested
in deciding something?
Martin Cooper wrote:
On 3/7/07, Joe Germuska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We talked about this at some length when the ActionContext was first
introduced.
IIRC, "at some length" would be a bit of an understatement. ;-) I'm sure
there are numerous lengthy threads on this subject in the list archives.
--
Martin Cooper
We also talked about having the base action implement
ActionCommand and/or some other options.
I think the only reason we didn't do it then was because it was still
new,
and we thought we'd let it settle in for a while. In fact, the idea you
suggest may at one point have been on the roadmap for 1.4.
Joe
On 3/7/07, Paul Benedict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Just gathering some opinions here...
>
> Would it be preferable to accept an ActionContext in execute() rather
> than the 4 parameters?
>
> public ActionForward execute(ActionContext context) throws Exception;
>
> Thanks,
> Paul
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
--
Joe Germuska
[EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://blog.germuska.com
"The truth is that we learned from João forever to be out of tune."
-- Caetano Veloso
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
