Rick Reumann wrote:
David Kennedy wrote the following on 3/18/2005 9:01 PM:
> [snip me talking about Layout]
But the above has never been the role of struts - to create view
components.
Yes, I agree and understand the relationships between the projects
better now. I must apologise, much of the pr
David Kennedy wrote the following on 3/18/2005 9:01 PM:
Totally agree. For example, I did some work with Struts Layout:Treeview
for my nav bar prototype. I very much appreciate volunteer effort, and
don't wish to knock anyone's efforts, but I have to say that for a
standard solution advocated by
Andrew Hill wrote the following on 3/20/2005 10:51 PM:
As for dispatch actions... hehe Im not making *that* mistake again.
urrrgh! Ill stick with a normal action and an 'if' statement in future
thanks :-)
How does using if logic in a regular Action make things better than
using a DispatchAction?
Yes.
I always validate in Actions and not in the form itself (though I often
delegate to a seperate helper class from the action (and configure the
helper in a subclass of ActionMapping and have an abstract action
superclass manage its lifecycle)).
Validating in the form I find to be troublesom
David, no worry about insulting anyone -- you raise good points.
Jack wrote:
Ted will tell you that only code matters. But, I think some things
other than just code matter to some of the people involved.
While Ted can speak for himself, I don't think that he'd tell you
that. He himself is an avi
I for one am more than interested in honest, informed, opinion such as
yours, David. Thanks! To be fair, Struts presently is in a bit of a
transition with things a bit in the air. On the one hand, the
origional architect is hired on another competing project and is
trying to pull a heist on the
The thing, for me, Frank, is that I like to reuse code as much as
possible. So, I treat most aspects of coding in Struts not unlike
coding an application which is good for any environment, and any
framework. This is also true of validation for me. I don't want to
be tied to any particular soluti
I do all my validations in the action, and it works great for me. I
built a layer upon the action that allows me to activate / deactivate
validation for some actions. So i turned my actions into page
controllers.
I suppose some people would argue that this "resists" the framework,
but i think that
Sorry, this is going to be a fairly off-topic reaction post, but
Lawrie's comments struck a chord with me.
Lawrie Gallardo wrote:
I'm relatively new to Struts and I have to say that I've found it to
have a realtively steep learning curve. And the only reason for this is
that there are so many d
Interesting approach Jack. It seems like a somewhat unnecassery layer
though... But then again, as with all architectural decisions, if you
had a reason for it, then it's a good solution (unless it's a bad
solution! :) )
I suppose it comes down to what is actually in an Action... If it is
abs
However, even sticking to the current multithreaded Action model,
why would this cause problems with validation? The ActionForm is
currently passed by the ActionServlet as a parameter to the
Action's execute() method - surely the ActionServlet could
similarly pass the ActionFrom as a parameter
I was waiting for another period where tons of commits were happening.
That's when I'd sneak in this one and see if anybody notices. :)
Now before somebody thinks I was serious (about the sneaking in part)
-- this actually is on my radar. I plan on digging up the arguments
around it. Speaking
You don't have to have a large file. I use the dispatching to
organize in a sort of "controller" fashion delegating processing to
other files. I do this when I have an AdministrativeAction, for
example. I use separate classes not unlike the way you use
instantiations of Action subclasses in your
Hubert Rabago wrote:
> >That certainly is one practice. Personally I don't use that. I
>mostly use my own Action subclasses, or if I want dispatch
>functionality, I used to use MappingDispatchAction. Now I use the
> >ActionDispatcher class in
>http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?
From: Joe Germuska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Struts Users Mailing List"
To: "Lawrie Gallardo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, user@struts.apache.org
Subject: Re: Wouldn't validation be better performed by Actions rather than
ActionForms?
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 14:
ECTED]>
> >Reply-To: Hubert Rabago <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: Struts Users Mailing List
> >Subject: Re: Wouldn't validation be better performed by Actions rather than
> >ActionForms?
> >Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:39:33 -0600
> >
> >Inline.
> >
At 7:35 PM + 3/18/05, Lawrie Gallardo wrote:
Thanks for your detailed answers, Joe.
Just a few queries though:
Now, if my understanding is correct:
1. There is always a one-to-one mapping between an ActionForm and
an ActionMapping,
Often not true. Earlier today on the dev-list Ted H. describe
eel like I
have a mountain ahead of me to learn all the necessary tips and tricks to do
any serious development with it...
Lawrie.
From: Rick Reumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Struts Users Mailing List"
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: Wouldn't validation
m
doing this I'll have the thought at the back of my mind that I could be
doing them much less painfully and efficiently with another framework...).
Lawrie.
From: Joe Germuska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Struts Users Mailing List"
To: "Lawrie Gallardo" <[EMAIL
Lawrie Gallardo wrote the following on 3/18/2005 12:17 PM:
Now if this is the case, would it not be better to have the ActionForm
as basically a dum data holder and have the validation method in the
Action classes instead? The strus-config.xml file could contain all the
required declarative vali
post.
>
> Lawrie
>
> >From: Hubert Rabago <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: Hubert Rabago <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: Struts Users Mailing List
> >Subject: Re: Wouldn't validation be better performed by Actions rather than
> >ActionForms?
> >D
I've always felt that class sizes should be reduced wherever possible.
Even when the code is extremely simplistic, as should be the case in
Actions generally, it's still more difficult to look through a higher
volume of code (this is in fact a known metric that most code analysis
tools use). Disp
Where did you get this idea, Frank? This seems out of the blue on a
thread about validation. I personally like the "new" dispatch action
at http://www.michaelmcgrady.com/button/jsp/dispatch_action.jsp a lot.
///;-)
Jack
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 12:25:00 -0500 (EST), Frank W. Zammetti
<[EMAIL PROTEC
vely steep learning curve) and could reduce
duplication when configuring applications.
Lawrie
From: "Frank W. Zammetti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Struts Users Mailing List"
To: "Struts Users Mailing List"
CC: user@struts.apache.org
Subject: Re: Wouldn'
On Fri, March 18, 2005 12:42 pm, Joe Germuska said:
> I don't know if dispatch style is "best practice." It's my preferred
> approach, but many experienced Struts developers don't like it much
> at all. And then you've got wackos like Frank Z who like to write
> more code just to show off their t
ROTECTED]>
> >To: Struts Users Mailing List
> >Subject: Re: Wouldn't validation be better performed by Actions rather than
> >ActionForms?
> >Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:27:11 -0600
> >
> >You raise a lot of points, and I admit I won't be able to respond to
At 5:17 PM + 3/18/05, Lawrie Gallardo wrote:
I'm still relatively new to Struts, but I can't help but feel that
validation would be better performed by Action classes rather than
ActionForm classes.
It seems to me that, ideally, you want
1. Validation,
2. Transformations (ie convert separate
Inline.
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 17:17:39 +, Lawrie Gallardo
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm still relatively new to Struts, but I can't help but feel that
> validation would be better performed by Action classes rather than
> ActionForm classes.
>
> It seems to me that, ideally, you want
> 1. Va
s Mailing List
Subject: Re: Wouldn't validation be better performed by Actions rather than
ActionForms?
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 09:19:10 -0800
I don't think you want an Action doing the validation, but I am with
you that validation does not belong to ActionForm. You don't have to
do
You raise a lot of points, and I admit I won't be able to respond to
all of them in one email (due mostly to time constraints). Besides,
there are others who could respond, so I'll leave some out for them.
:)
There are/can be different levels of validation. Some validation you
perform before oth
Is it really true that DispatchAction is now the accepted "best practice"?
If so I have to say I disagree with that standard (if not, ignore me!)
--
Frank W. Zammetti
Founder and Chief Software Architect
Omnytex Technologies
http://www.omnytex.com
On Fri, March 18, 2005 12:17 pm, Lawrie Gallard
I don't think you want an Action doing the validation, but I am with
you that validation does not belong to ActionForm. You don't have to
do it there, by the way.
Jack
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 17:17:39 +, Lawrie Gallardo
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm still relatively new to Struts, but I can'
I'm still relatively new to Struts, but I can't help but feel that
validation would be better performed by Action classes rather than
ActionForm classes.
It seems to me that, ideally, you want
1. Validation,
2. Transformations (ie convert separate day, month and year HTML fields to
Java Date ob
33 matches
Mail list logo
