FWIW, I agree with Patrick.

Blake

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
> Pat Lightbody
> Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 2:32 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] WebWork2, here I come!
>
>
> I don't agree, and I haven't looked at CVS lately, but if the Action
> interface is gone I'd like for it to be put back so that we can
> discuss this
> more.
>
> I think the mistake in your logic is that an action is a "just" a
> POJO. It's
> NOT though, it's a POJO with a method called execute() that contains a
> "stuff". That stuff is specifically put in the execute() method
> because that
> object needs to be recognized as something more than "just" an object: it
> HAS an execute() method, and therefore it IS an Action. This "is
> a" identity
> has been used by OO for decades and there is no reason we should
> get rid of
> it now.
>
> The argument that making your object implement Action ties it to XWork is
> dumb. So what if it is... even without it, having a method called
> execute()
> ties it to XWork anyway. Even having support for any method (a la command
> pattern), it is still tied to XWork because the action was written to
> operate in certain ways (IoC pattern support, getters and setters, and
> possible callouts to ActionContext).
>
> Please don't underestimate the importance of compile-time
> checking. For some
> things (validation, type coercion, web layers, etc) using runtime features
> of the language is very nice. But I don't want everything to be runtime --
> that's why I choose WebWork: it provides a nice balance between
> compile time
> and runtime typing.
>
> I vote a BIG -1 to removing the Action interface, I have yet to see a real
> use case that would demonstrate the importance of doing this.
>
> -Pat
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jason Carreira" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 11:16 AM
> Subject: RE: [OS-webwork] WebWork2, here I come!
>
>
> > 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
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
>
>



-------------------------------------------------------
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

Reply via email to