On Wed, May 24, 2006 10:32 am, Alexandru Popescu wrote: > In the DWR-WW action invocation toy I have used when building > InfoQ.com, the action invocation passes through exactly the same > process as a normal request, so I have no concerns.
I haven't seen your work, so I can't talk intelligently about it... I would agree though that if DWR is going to make HTTP calls to execute Actions (a suggestion I might add that I made about two months ago to Joe with regard to how to better integrate with Struts), then that certainly alleviates my concern. However, that's a completely different calling mechanism for DWR, as I mentioned when I originally made the suggestion... I suggested something of a pluggable architecture in terms of the calling mechanism from DWR to the target object, so you could do an IPC call as it basically does not, or an HTTP request, or RMI, or whatever else... I don't see that as being a problem, but it *does* fundamentally change the way DWR works now, at least (a) as far as I understand it and (b) in this case specifically for WW, as it obviously couldn't be the *only* way it works. > That's in fact a good example of my arguement: good developers will > always know what to do to protect their site. Bad developers will not > know this. We are preparing a framework so that they are gonna use. If > they want to use it the wrong way, I would say that this is definitely > their problem. From my pov I just want that the simple things to be > extremely simple, and complex things possible. Other than this, it is > developers talent. Well, you certainly won't get any argument from me that you have to count on developers to be smart to a large extent :) That being said, I think there is still a difference between simply providing a framework where developers can either be smart or shoot themselves in the foot, and providing things that either (a) directly do something that a smart developer probably wouldn't do or (b) make it seem like it's the right way to do things. For an example of (a), imagine Webwork provides a Google Suggests widget that makes an Ajax request on each keystroke... that's something a smart developer wouldn't do, as I think we just agreed! :-), so WW shouldn't provide that out-of-the-box. For an example of (b), even if such a widget was only part of an example app, people tend to look at those as defining best practices, so doing something that, at least arguably, isn't a best practice, should be avoided there too. As for the simple things extremely simple and the complex things possible... so long as the simple things aren't made extremely simple by doing them in a less than optimal way (i.e., a widget sending requests on each keystroke), then of course I agree :) > ./alex Frank --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
