On 1/14/06, Sean Corfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry, but I think that's a terrible idea. The real benefit of
> Model-Glue's implicit invocation architecture is that message names
> and listener method names are completely unrelated. I think what you
> are suggesting would lead to unmaintainable applications because of
> the 'bleeding' of method names (and controller names) into the event
> handlers.
I definitely appreciate the critique, but I am not sure I completely
agree with the final verdict. Most MG applications I have been
exposed to have method names that are aliased to identical "message"
names in MG apps. I see things like this:
<controller name="myController" type="someApp.controller.Controller">
<message-listener message="doThis" function="doThis" />
<message-listener message="editThis" function="editThis" />
<message-listener message="saveThat" function="saveThat" />
</controller>
I understand that sometimes developers may want to alias to the method
to a different "message" value (and that capability should remain),
but it's kinda pain to have to type all the "busywork" of this stuff
in the controller config. This feels like convention over
configuration to me, and would be an optional time saver when
developing new apps.
-Cameron
--
Cameron Childress
Sumo Consulting Inc
http://www.sumoc.com
---
cell: 678.637.5072
aim: cameroncf
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------
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).
An archive of the CFCDev list is available at
www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
