Re: Confusing model with controller

2010/5/25 Robert Graf-Waczenski : > My intuition for the "model" is "that which is serialized to disk" (or, more > generally: "to persistent storage"). This means that such a class does not > contain any business logic but only has getters and/or setters. No, domain objects do not need to be anemi

Re: Confusing model with controller

My intuition for the "model" is "that which is serialized to disk" (or, more generally: "to persistent storage"). This means that such a class does not contain any business logic but only has getters and/or setters. In reality (and in many nontrivial projects) the distinction is not as strict,

Re: Confusing model with controller

2010/5/25 Fabio Perfetti : > so? what is the model? the beans? > > public class Employee{ >   private String name; >   private String surname; >   public setter/getter ... > } I'd call them "domain objects", it's a more appropriate term. So yes they are. And services, DAO, EJBs (if present) are pa

Re: Confusing model with controller

so? what is the model? the beans? public class Employee{ private String name; private String surname; public setter/getter ... } 2010/5/25 Antonio Petrelli > 2010/5/25 Fabio Perfetti : > > I am wondering if the actions belongs to the model layer or to the > > controller layer. > > Act

Re: Confusing model with controller

2010/5/25 Fabio Perfetti : > I am wondering if the actions belongs to the model layer or to the > controller layer. Actions are by definition part of the controller. > All the example on the web are simple! > Anyone can explain me? (with an example please) No example but a simple argument: the m

Confusing model with controller

Hi all, I am wondering if the actions belongs to the model layer or to the controller layer. All the example on the web are simple! Anyone can explain me? (with an example please) Thanks