[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Bob, I'll try to give my 1 cent to the topic and also to answer you
more concrete because I believe you want some concrete answers, not
theoretical conversations.
Background: I just started a Struts project with Hibernate. I have chosen to
use the Data Access
, October 18, 2005 4:49 PM
Subject: RE: What's wrong with DTOs?
From: Leon Rosenberg
P.S. Have you ever considered, that the View itself can be an
MVC as well?
Yes, patterns are fractal.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL
On 10/19/05, Leon Rosenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think there are no fractal patterns, but fractal architectures,
which follows same pattern in different levels. Example:
a typical 3-tier can be considered MVC
the presentation layer in the 3-tier could itself be an MVC too (jsp
the view,
Let it never be said that the myriad OT discussions on the Struts mailing
list aren't worth something :)
--
Frank W. Zammetti
Founder and Chief Software Architect
Omnytex Technologies
http://www.omnytex.com
AIM: fzammetti
Yahoo: fzammetti
MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, October 19, 2005 8:50 am,
I wish to tell you a story, to show because I changed my mind about DTOs.
Once upon a time I used to write GUIs (i.e. Swing GUIs). I have to tell
that I used to mix controller code with model. But when I think about that
era I noticed that it was pretty easy to write code. Why now is it so
On 10/18/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You may ask now what's the place for HttpServletRequest and its company. I
think its natural place is inside the document itself, hidden inside its
code, so that the interface is independent from the use of servlet
technology. In fact
On Tue, October 18, 2005 11:05 am, Ted Husted said:
The question is whether we want to stop transfering the data when we
get to the servlet (or filter or Action), or continue to transfer the
data on to the model. If we stop at the Action layer, and start
making model calls there, we eliminate
-Original Message-
From: Frank W. Zammetti
[snip]
Ted, this seems to be saying that you consider the Actions to
be part of the view... is that what you intended?
I can't answer for Ted, but I consider *all* of MVC to be part of the
view tier. The Model is just the
On 10/18/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Frank W. Zammetti
[snip]
Ted, this seems to be saying that you consider the Actions to
be part of the view... is that what you intended?
I can't answer for Ted, but I consider *all* of MVC
From: Leon Rosenberg
On 10/18/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Frank W. Zammetti
[snip]
Ted, this seems to be saying that you consider the Actions to be
part of the view... is that what you intended?
I can't answer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/18/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can't answer for Ted, but I consider *all* of MVC to be part of the view
tier. The Model is just the presentation layer's view of the business system.
It should be abstract and opaque and contain all of
-Original Message-
From: Dave Newton
I'm still not clear on how the entirety of MVC is the V
It's not. MVC is a View Tier pattern, though. Within the pattern it
separates the Model, an abstraction of the business logic, the View,
which displays a representation of the Model, and the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
+1. The first thing I always preach new developers
on my team is that they should think the entire web
tier away and replace it (mentally) with a Swing or
whatever client, without changing anything in the
subsequent layers, and the application still has to
work as
On 10/18/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can't answer for Ted, but I consider *all* of MVC to be
part of the
view tier. The Model is just the presentation layer's view of the
business system. It should be abstract and opaque and
contain all of
the business logic.
+1.
.V
Christian Bollmeyer wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
+1. The first thing I always preach new developers
on my team is that they should think the entire web
tier away and replace it (mentally) with a Swing or
whatever client, without changing anything in the
subsequent layers, and the
Only fair to mark this thread OT by now, hope no one minds...
Talking about the view that considers what goes on in Struts Actions to be
part of the view, here's why I don't agree with that perception...
In that view, if I have a webapp and later want to make it a Swing-based
app, I would be
From: Leon Rosenberg
P.S. Have you ever considered, that the View itself can be an
MVC as well?
Yes, patterns are fractal.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
George
Could you explain on how MVC patterns are fractal?
Thanks,
Martin-
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: user@struts.apache.org
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 4:49 PM
Subject: RE: What's wrong with DTOs?
From: Leon Rosenberg
P.S. Have you ever considered
I don't think anything wrong w/ DTO.
You have your DAO, your model... in my case I use collections as DTO,
but beanutils is fine.
.V
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, Gurus,
Background: I just started a Struts project with Hibernate. I have chosen to
use the Data Access Object with (Abstract
I think DTOs is the best solution.
However, is tedious to copy properties. Yes, I know that you can use
BeanUtils but sometimes you need a DTO that is a combinations of two model
objects and you have to use getters and setters.
2005/10/17, Vic Cekvenich [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I don't think
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
*I think it is best to use directly domain objects, i.e. ye old (but good)
OOP with real objects.*
**
+1 :)
Best Regards
Rafael Mauricio Nami
2005/10/17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'm not a guru but...
Once I thought that DTOs are a nice way to separate
So, is another way of saying what your saying is that you feel that
DTO+DAO=Something Good(tm)?
So, if instead of having:
class CustomerDTO {
private String firstName;
private String lastName;
private String id;
public setFirstName(String);
public setLastName(String);
public
What I agree is that objects have to be rich in information AND
associations. I don´t like(it´s just my opinion) reflecting my tables in my
Objects. Like, if I have a Category and a Product, I like to associate these
two objects, not just add productId in Category. About the methods, I had
all the
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
So, is another way of saying what your saying is that you feel that
DTO+DAO=Something Good(tm)?
So, if instead of having:
class CustomerDTO {
public setFirstName(String);
public setLastName(String);
public getFirstName(String);
public getLastName(String);
}
class
On Mon, October 17, 2005 1:15 pm, Dave Newton said:
My only response would be that ultimately, I still prefer to have less
coupling: with a POJO bean and a DAO it gives me one more place I can
change implementation. That said, if you added a setDao or whatever to
the above Customer I might
The original idea was that one Data Transfer Object could be used to
represent many domain objects. Perhaps even *all* the domain objects.
The view tier could then ferry back and forth this one object instead
of having to deal with a plethora of finely grained objects. All the
view layer sees is a
26 matches
Mail list logo
