But the spouse's lawyer (Controller) is simply relaying the information
from the other party (Model).
It's the spouse (model) that determines whether something is valid.
If (I keep the house)
{
She gets the dogs.
}
Else
{
Invalid transaction.
};
The transaction is validated whether it was presented from a ColdFusion
controller (the lawyer), a .net program or run as an ad-hoc in
Management Studio.
________________________________
From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Adam Haskell
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 7:48 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [CFCDEV] Re: Do you VALIDATE in the SAVE method or keep 'em
separate?
I've used this anecdote before, and I think it is amusing so I'll use it
again. The way I think about it is The model and View are going through
a divorce and the controller and service are the lawyers. Now thinking
about it in these terms, would it make sense for the Controller (the
View's lawyer) to be taking care of the Model's Affairs, in this case
validating documents for the model? That doesn't make much sense, in
this case the Service should be earning it's keep and making sure the
documents are valid and ready for it's client, the model. Sure the
Controller might throw in some JS for the View to do some preliminary
checking so the always bitchy, soon-to-be ex, spouse won't complain but
it really is the spouses lawyer's duty to inform the spouse that the
documents are valid, or return the documents to some one telling them
to try again, no deal. That being said Brian's earlier statement about
calling something from Flex really has helped me clear up what should go
where. Anecdotes provide a means to getting over the hump but once you
are over the hump real life programming drives the point home and
Brian's example/thought process is spot on.
Adam Haskell
On Jan 14, 2008 11:53 PM, Brian Kotek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It depends on what you mean by "appropriate methods", but if you're
talking about something similar to what Peter used an an example:
If (Order.isValid())
{
Order.save();
}
Else
{
Screen = OrderForm;
Data = Order;
};
No, I wouldn't be doing that in the Controller (and I think we might be
getting some miscommunication here because I'm pretty sure Peter and
Sean wouldn't either). My Controllers are very dumb. The only thing they
do is ask the Model to perform some business logic (via the service
layer), and then invoke the appropriate views or execute a redirect.
That covers 99% of what my Controllers do.
The problem with doing something like the above in the Controller means
that the model is no longer neutral and self-contained. I can't call the
service layer from Flex now, because the logic that checks validity and
does saving is executed by the Controller, not the Model. I would have a
method in my service named something like "
orderService.saveOrder(orderData)", and internally that service layer
method might create an Order, validate it, save it, and return a success
or failure result that the Controller can then use to determine how to
proceed (cflocation or redisplay form with errors, for example). I'm
pretty sure that this is what Sean and Peter are also talking about.
On Jan 14, 2008 9:11 PM, Baz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sean, Brian, it seems you are both on board with getting a newUserBean()
from the service in the controller then calling the appropriate methods
on that UserBean later on in the controller. Do you also handle queries
or multiple objects in the same way that Peter does? That is, do you
code gateway-type methods into your service that interact with a
DAO/Gateway to return multiple instances of your object?
Baz
On Jan 14, 2008 4:40 PM, Brian Kotek <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
Absolutely, I didn't mean to imply that the service actually does
everything itself.
On Jan 14, 2008 7:35 PM, Sean Corfield < [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote:
On Jan 14, 2008 1:19 PM, Brian Kotek < [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote:
> I think he is saying that his controllers only interact with services.
The
> easy rule of thumb for me is: if this was called by Flex instead of my
HTML
> controller, would it still work? The answer should be "yes". Which
means all
> logic of any consequence (beyond doing something like a cflocation,
which is
> specific to the HTML view anyway) should be handled in the model.
Right, but that can still be in the domain object rather than the
service. You just need to expose the API via the service for remote
interaction. It doesn't mean all the business logic is in the
*service* which is at the heart of Baz's question, I believe.
--
Sean A Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN
An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/
"If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive."
-- Margaret Atwood
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"CFCDev" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cfcdev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
