I was not talking about you. I was talking about JSF. JSF is well known for being for tools. Read your own citations.
On 3/20/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't agree with you FacesServlet is a pure front controller, Faces > lacks an application controller on purpose but not a front controller. > It fits to the description in the blue prints and in Martin Fowler > book, the best reference on Enterprise applications patterns I know > of. Just tell me why you think it isn't? I will agree that JSf doesn't > have an application controller (this what Shale offer after all) but > it is totally front-controller oriented according to the definition. I > think you are confusing application controller and front controller > patterns, But since I disagree with you I don't get MVC and you are > not interested. Fallacies again Dakota... > > First, here's some reference about JSF being front controller oriented > (not by Craig since you always claim he has an hidden agenda, > something I found totally ridiculous): > > > http://www.codeguru.com/csharp/.net/net_general/toolsand3rdparty/article.php/c11139/ > > http://www.oracle.com/technology/tech/java/newsletter/articles/introjsf/index.html > http://websphere.sys-con.com/read/46516.htm > http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/wa-dsgnpatjsf.html > http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/GUI/JavaServerFaces/ > > > Oh yeah right those articles are from big corporations who just want > to make profit on poor developers.... But do some searches yourself, > you'll find tons of reference on the subject. > > Here's what I get of MVC in JSF : > > Controler = FrontController + event dispatchers > Model = backing beans (data model) + UI components (ui model) > View = renderers + the view handler > > So where am I wrong? Please give me some technical details for once > instead of saying I don't get it. > > By the way, I develop JSF applications using Vanilla Eclipse and my > coworkers do to. Tools support is not why we have chosen JSF. > > > On 3/20/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This (below) has nothing to do with smarts. It has to do with the > purpose > > of JSF. The same was true of Visual Basic. A genius might use it or > build > > it or whatever. Indeed, I have friends smarter than me for sure who > worked > > for years with Visual Basic. But, it was made for the technically > > challenged and is a tool, nonetheless. JSF, I must assume, was built > the > > way it was as an answer to the .NET challenge. Myself, I think that is > a > > mistake, but I understand the reasoning. I am not against JSF, never > have > > been. > > > > <snip> > > On 3/20/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > On 3/20/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > JSF is built for those who are > > > > technically challenged and for tools. > > > > > > Ok, once again people who use JSF aren't smart, huh wait "technically > > > challenged". If it isn't a fallacy I wonder what it is... > > > > </snip> > > > > This (below) notion that JSF has a front controller is plain bogus. I > > recommend you follow up on this, check definitions, etc. (aside from > those > > marketing definitions Craig has offered) and think it through. Try the > > following sort of basic introduction to the front controller pattern: > > > > > http://java.sun.com/blueprints/corej2eepatterns/Patterns/FrontController.html > > http://java.sun.com/blueprints/corej2eepatterns/Patterns/index.html > > > > Mostly, I think, you need to take a look at how the model / view / > > controller are connected in your web architecture, with a clear > > understanding, as Ted has pointed out, that the web MVC decoupling is: > > > > controller --> model --> view > > > > If you chose to couple everything, then I am not interested in your > ideas. > > Someone else might be, but I am not. > > > > <snip> > > > > > If you had taken a serious look at JSF you will see it isn't page > > > controller based but front controller based. FacesServlet is > > > equivalent to the Struts ActionServlet, the big difference is that JSF > > > doesn't include straight out of the book an Application Controller. It > > > focuses on the MVC patterns in which by the way "C" stand for input > > > controller and not application controller, something a lot of people > > > don't get (quite well explained in Fowler book, a worth reading). > > > > > > </snip> > > > > > > -- > > "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its > back." > > ~Dakota Jack~ > > > > > > > -- > Alexandre Poitras > Québec, Canada > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back." ~Dakota Jack~
