I actually could be wrong.. Not sure.. I'd recommend writing a unit test that does that, and then step through and see where it goes! there are some examples of executing actions in the unit tests..
Eric > -----Original Message----- > From: Robles, Rogelio [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 10:13 PM > To: 'Turbine Users List' > Subject: RE: Action->Action flow > > > > So there's no way in Turbine to forward to the controller a > destination like > an Action or Screen? chaining them? > > Why data.setAction("secondAction") in the first aciont, can't (or should > not) do the trick ? > > Rogelio > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Eric Pugh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 6:54 AM > > To: Turbine Users List > > Subject: RE: Action->Action flow > > > > > > Here you go: > > > > VelocityAction action = (VelocityAction) ActionLoader > > .getInstance().getInstance("CreateReactions"); > > action.doPerform(data, context); > > > > However, Oron is right.. You should have VERY little code in > > an action as actions are hard to unit test. (You are writing > > unit tests right :-) ) > > > > Eric > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Vjeran Marcinko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 4:30 PM > > > To: Turbine Users List > > > Subject: Re: Action->Action flow > > > > > > > > > Hi Oron. > > > > > > I am aware that such way only small amount of code will be repeated > > > (doService and setting template), but I really wanted not > > to have any > > > copies, but to reuse Action class maximally. Anyway, as I have > > > understanding of Turbine, flow from : > > > Action->Action > > > Screen->Action > > > Screen->Screen > > > isn't possible. > > > Only Action->Screen is allowed, which is limiting in some cases. > > > > > > Thanx anyway for advice. > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Oron O Adam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: "'Turbine Users List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 4:24 PM > > > Subject: RE: Action->Action flow > > > > > > > > > > Hi Vjeran > > > > > > > > Seems to me if you make your actions thin and put the logic in > > > some joint > > > > service class you will have > > > > > > > > Action a code > > > > { > > > > if(need to display screen) > > > > { > > > > setTemplate(additional screen) > > > > } > > > > else // no need for screen > > > > { > > > > doService > > > > setTemplate(some final screen) > > > > } > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > Action b code > > > > { > > > > doService() > > > > settemplate(some final screen) > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > 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] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
