A question here for the list. I'd like to know at what points you
decide to create a full business object vs. creating a Bean vs.
creating a transfer object. And don't just say "it depends"! Just
kidding...say it depends but try to explain what you think it depends
on.

For example, if an entity isn't that complex, I've found that what I
call a Bean can handle all three chores. On one hand creating a TO for
a fairly simple Bean seems like overkill, and creating a full business
object behind a Bean can also seem like overkill if the BO isn't doing
much that the Bean is already doing, such as validating itself and
holding instance data.

In fact, in most cases, unless the bean is really heavy (maybe
compositing a complex Validation object within itself) I have little
use for transfer objects.

Of course if the entity requires complex business logic then a
full-fledged business object is in order, there is no place for that
kind of logic in a Bean.

I suppose the real point is that a good manager or service object is
necessary to hide these variations. As long as the UI is going through
a manager, you can change how the underlying model is doing things
fairly easily. What does everyone else think?


----------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to 
[email protected] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' as the subject of the 
email.

CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by CFXHosting 
(www.cfxhosting.com).

CFCDev is supported by New Atlanta, makers of BlueDragon
http://www.newatlanta.com/products/bluedragon/index.cfm

An archive of the CFCDev list is available at 
www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]


Reply via email to