Hello, Plug-ins implementation for brute ACL restriction (e.g. user cannot access admin module). While helper's variant provide you fine tuning (e.g. if user didn't did something he can't access some page that is theoretically is allowed to be visited by him).
Another way to fine-tune ACL restrictions is assertions. But helper's is the most finest method :)) So basically you can use only plug-in, but if you'll need fine tuning you'll need to use both (plug-in and helper) or even three (plug-in, assertion, helper)... 2010/6/10 Andrew Ballard <[email protected]>: > I was reading this page: > > http://framework.zend.com/wiki/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=39025 > > The information looks interesting, but I'm curious about something: > > I have seen people on the list ask about the difference between using > an action helper versus a controller plug-in for checking an ACL > during the controller's pre-dispatch cycle. I thought the difference > had to do at least in part with the helper's preDispatch being called > only once per request, while the plug-in's preDispatch could > potentially be called multiple times (i.e. as a result of _forward or > similar calls), but that does not seem to be the case as far as I can > tell. I notice that this proposal uses both an action helper AND a > controller plug-in instead of just one or the other, and I'm wondering > why both are used/necessary. It SEEMS to work for if just the plug-in > is loaded. Is the action helper just a means to access the ACL > embedded in the plug-in from within the controller action itself? > > Andrew > -- Sincerely yours, Aleksey V. Zapparov A.K.A. ixti FSF Member #7118 Mobile Phone: +34 617 179 344 Homepage: http://www.ixti.ru JID: [email protected] *Origin: Happy Hacking!
