I just cant see why the JSTL standard seems to be a product of pandering to PHP hackers (There are some nicely written PHP apps).. Worse still folks who are publishing books on the subject are encouraging this sort of thing.. I think that rancid festering camel's jism would perhaps be a more fitting term than dog-food, for the sort of thing you were describing :o)
On Friday, July 11, 2003, at 08:11 PM, Davidson, Glenn wrote:
I recently saw the term "Dog Food" and found it amusing. I might not be
using it correctly in this context ( I just might be eating some dog food
with my prior email :-) ) . What I was trying to get across is that just
because there are other languages/technologies that allow programmers to
build applications in a poor manner, that in itself should not be used to
justify the addition of features that would allow Struts based applications
to be built in the same manner. I chose struts as the framework for our web
development specifically because it didn't allow the type of mixing of logic
and presentation that was mentioned earlier in this thread. If I wanted to
mix logic and presentation I would use PHP, it makes it very easy to do
that. If struts is going to be MVC, then let's keep it MVC.
-----Original Message----- From: Mark Lowe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 11, 2003 11:30 AM To: Struts Users Mailing List Subject: Re: Using JSTL tags instead of Struts tags
I'm familiar with the tech idiom "dog-food" .. but I have no idea what it is you're talking about please can you explain what you understand by dog-food coding?
If your saying what I think you are are you sure you're not choking on some?
On Friday, July 11, 2003, at 02:36 PM, Davidson, Glenn wrote:
Please tell me that this is the start of a new urban legend and a joke.
There are people who like "Dog food" coding (see PHP, Perl) but this
should
not be used as an excuse to pollute what Struts stands for. I
understand
that you want to increase the acceptance of Struts but history has
shown
that as soon as you start down the slippery slope of including "Dog
Food"
features you become the technology providers that you currently make
fun of.
I humbly request that you reconsider SQL tags and other "Dog Food"
features.
Struts has made a great start and up till now the direction has been
solid.
No "Dog Food" please!
Glenn
-----Original Message----- From: Mark Galbreath [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 7:20 PM To: 'Struts Users Mailing List' Subject: RE: Using JSTL tags instead of Struts tags
I think this approach is bullshit. Why would you develop "SQL" tags to get access to the db from the view? You are contradicting yourself...this is exactly what PERL and PHP do. This is not good programming practice!
Mark
-----Original Message----- From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 6:38 PM
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003, David Geary wrote:
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 15:22:17 -0600 From: David Geary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Using JSTL tags instead of Struts tags
On Thursday, Jul 10, 2003, at 15:18 America/Denver, Mark Galbreath wrote:
Is this the same David Geary that wrote, among others, "Advanced JavaServer Pages?"
Yes.
David was also a member of the JSR-52 expert group (JSTL), and he's on the JSR-127 expert group (JavaServer Faces) as well.
I've never been a fan of having SQL tags (especially the updating
ones) in
JSTL, for all the obvious reasons. However, there are a whole bunch of
developers in the world who are used to model 1 style development (VB,
PHP,
PERL, Cold Fusion, ...), and it would not be fair for expert groups to
ignore the needs of those developers, simply because we might not like
what
people will do with the result. This was a case where the group
creating
the standard was actually listening to what users wanted.
Beyond that, it *is* feasible to separate business logic and
presentation
logic into separate JSP pages, and enjoy the fact that the page is
automatically recompiled without needing the app to be restarted.
Couple
that with the fact that Struts lets you say that a particular <action>
really does a RequestDispatcher.include(), and you've suddenly got the
ability to program Actions as JSP pages ... sort of a mind twisting
approach, but it seems like it would be feasible in scenarios where the
business logic is simple enough to be scripted in JSP tags that are
only
used for their side effects, not for their output (which would get
thrown
away anyway when Struts ultimately forwards to the presentation JSP).
In
such a scenario, having SQL access tags would make a lot of sense.
david
Craig
--------------------------------------------------------------------- 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]
