This is a concern that Mike expressed as well, but I challenged him to look at the code and see if it really makes sense. He looked, and grudgingly agreed that it made sense to get rid of it, especially since it took like 10 minutes and Gavin from Hibernate was there, talking about how he'd removed the Peristable interface from Hibernate because it was just useless.
Giving people a warm fuzzy feeling is not enough justification, IMO, to needlessly tie Actions to Xwork, when they can really just be POJO's with no-arg methods returning a String. Jason > -----Original Message----- > From: Hani Suleiman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 12:01 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] WebWork2, here I come! > > > I agree completely. All this 'just define it/figure it out at > runtime' > stuff really bothers me. Interfaces might be very 'old > school' now, but > they are useful, just so you know at compile time what > contracts your > components/classes/whatever are adhering to. I still have yet > to look > at xwork (waiting for migration guides+tools and performance > reports), > but the concept of having all information in an xml file and > an active > effort to remove type safety/contracts from code feels very wrong. I > understand the allure of 'but you can use ANYTHING as an > action!', but > I do feel that those things that are used as an action should > anticipate somewhat that they are one and will be treated as one, in > most cases. > ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now. Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET. http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100006ave/direct;at.asp_061203_01/01 _______________________________________________ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
