Thank you Brian. It's clear now.

Ronan

Brian Kotek escreveu:
> No, a "bean" is just a pattern that means that the object has getters 
> and setters for all of its properties. It can absolutely have other 
> logic and methods within it, and I would say it absolutely should. An 
> object that is nothing but properties along with corresponding getters 
> and setters is virtually useless. One might as well be using a regular 
> structure. Make those beans rich objects! :-)
>
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 12:12 PM, Ronan Lucio <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>
>     Brian,
>
>     Brian Kotek escreveu:
>
>>     order = factory.create('Order', id);
>>     result = factory.create('Result');
>>     order.populate(data);
>>     // gateway will call order.validate() and if all is OK, call
>>     order.save() and set isSuccess to true.
>>     // if validation fails, the errors are set on the result object
>>     and returned
>>     gateway.save(order, result);
>>     if(result.isSuccess()) {
>>     result.setSuccessMessage('Order was saved successfully');
>>     }
>>     return result;
>>      
>>
>>
>>         Brian, I really liked your comments and your suggestions.
>>         I'm just talking about how this suggest should be
>>         done/implemented.
>>
>>         In one hand putting some logic inside beans looks a betters
>>         abstraction.
>>         In the other hand it doesn't gives us a good encapsulation
>>         because it's one more CFC to handle part of the business's rules.
>>
>>
>>     I'm not sure I follow. What do you mean by "one more CFC to
>>     handle the business's rules"? Does what I'm showing above answer
>>     your question?
>
>     Yes, it answers.
>
>     In my readings about beans, DAOs, OO and etc I understood that
>     beans should have only getters and setters.
>     In Portuguese we could name it as "donkey object", they have no
>     business logic inside.
>
>     My doubt is if I put business logic inside beans I was breaking
>     some OO concepts - turn beans in a richer (smarter?) objects.
>     If you do this I suppose it's not breaking OO concepts or app
>     maintainability.
>
>     One more questions.
>     "Telling the object what to do" can take much more operations into
>     beans, right?
>
>     example:
>     client.activate() or deactivate();
>     client.activateGoogleAnalytics( keycode );
>     client.activateChatOnline();
>
>
>     What do you think about that?
>
>     Thanks,
>     Ronan
>
>
>
>
> >

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to