Wake up mate, your having another nightmare... those overtime induced ASP flashbacks can be heavy d00d....
-----Original Message----- From: Mark Galbreath [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 29 May 2003 20:17 To: 'Struts Users Mailing List' Subject: RE: Justifying Struts I'm with you, Mike! That's why I stopped using this confounded framework and returned to good ole ASP.... Mark > I've heard about > Struts and have researched it over the last few hours. The MVC > approach makes > sense, but I'm still not sold on it yet. Here are some doubts I have. > > 1) I think the separation of presentation (view) from the model and > controller > has gone too far (or probably is not done well in Struts). For > example, I like > to have my front end developers do form (field) validation. These > developers > should not have to write beans to do this (all examples I've seen so > far do > form validation in Java beans). This somewhat contradicts the J2EE > development > model where "application developers", who are basically scripters (not > OO > developers), do the front end work. > > 2) There is just too much junk to write to do a simple form. The > samples I've > seen have involve too many files to do a simple form. Plus, why > should I have > to write a new bean for each form. Why can't the bean either be > generated > automatically or there be a general purpose bean (with properties that > are > created dynamically) that works for all forms? > > 3) We already separate business logic nicely, usually by encapsulating > the > logic in beans or EJBs. By the time the "application developers" get > to work > writing JSP/HTML, they are not writing any business logic. So why add > the > overhead of Struts (or any other framework)? > > 4) Because we separate out business logic into beans and EJBs, Java is > simply > used as a scripting langauge in our JSPs - in just the same way that > VBScript > is used in Active Server Pages. We try not to confuse the object > oriented > language called Java, with the scripting language called Java that we > use in > JSPs. We use a very small subset of Java in JSPs. > > 5) Based on #4, I don't particularly care for taglibs either. Again, > we are > simply using Java to do simple scripting. Loops are probably the most > complex > thing we do. So why add the extra overhead of taglibs. A loop is a > loop > whether it has the syntax of Java or a taglib. Plus, if I want my > front-end > developers to get any experience with serious development, I'd rather > have them > dealing with Java as opposed to taglibs, which have no value in the > real world > of programming. > > 6) Performance is unknown. I've looked through the mail archives and > have seen > requests for performance figures, but no answers (plenty of folks > pushing > Struts though). > > Mike --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
