I've seen different approaches to this issue. There are some implementations of a "session facade" out there, that encapsulate all access to the session scope, but I don't really like that idea and find it kind of pointless.
I prefer to limit the number of objects that have to interact with the session scope and leave it at that. For example, in one of my applications I have a CurrentUser object, which stores some of its data in the session scope, and that is the only object that interacts with the session scope in my entire model. I feel that by doing that I'm encapsulating access quite well, as if I ever need to change the way my app is interacting with the session scope (e.g., by changing to the client scope), I know that I will only have to change one object. Bob On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 9:07 AM, aliaspooryorik <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi cfc gurus :) > > I have a security system with a login method that stores the user id > in the session scope. As one of the rules is that objects should only > know about what is passed to them, is this considered to be an > acceptable compromise, or do you have specific objects which access > the session scope (like you have specific classes to access the > database). > > Thanks for your thoughts. > > - John > > > -- Bob Silverberg www.silverwareconsulting.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
