Getting back to classic MVC: The Model retains the state of the
application. The View renders state and acquires input. The Controller
accepts input from the View, updates the Model, and selects the next
View. The selected View renders the updated Model, closing the loop.
For enterprise applicati
[Moving repy from another thread]
When we added using a forward for the input value (where a request
gets bounced should validation failed), Craig noted that allowing a
URI there, rather than a forward, was an error. From the beginning, it
should have been a forward.
I think the case Joe describe
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 16:00:52 -0500, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, considering refactoring for an IOC container is on the RoadMap for 1.4.
>
> * http://struts.apache.org/roadmap.html
>
> Both Don and I have had excellent luck refactoring for Spring, as has
> Matt Raible. It's Craig'
Yes, considering refactoring for an IOC container is on the RoadMap for 1.4.
* http://struts.apache.org/roadmap.html
Both Don and I have had excellent luck refactoring for Spring, as has
Matt Raible. It's Craig's first preference for Shale, and I believe
the BeeHive crew is using it. Seems the o
> From: Ted Husted [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
====
>
> If I went through some of my old applications, I'm sure I could find
> several others. I often passed the action in as a bean and rendered
> via a RTE .
What does RTE stand for?
--
Peter Pilgrim
Operations/IT - Credit Suisse First Boston,
At 10:30 AM -0500 3/18/05, Ted Husted wrote:
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:05:50 -0600, Joe Germuska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I don't really understand this use case. unless the contents of
are hyper-dynamic, you'd need the same form bean to back
it, even if upon submit the thing actually goes to a
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:05:50 -0600, Joe Germuska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't really understand this use case. unless the contents of
> are hyper-dynamic, you'd need the same form bean to back
> it, even if upon submit the thing actually goes to a different
> action. I am familiar with t
At 7:08 AM -0500 3/18/05, Ted Husted wrote:
Following up on some other threads, here's some things we might
consider for a future release
* Attaching a ViewHelper to an ActionForward.
** The ViewHelper (aka ViewController, aka ProxyAction, aka
SetupGizmo) would be able to access the contexts before
Following up on some other threads, here's some things we might
consider for a future release
* Attaching a ViewHelper to an ActionForward.
** The ViewHelper (aka ViewController, aka ProxyAction, aka
SetupGizmo) would be able to access the contexts before the
ActionForward fires. It would *not*
