On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 09:03:38PM -0800, Jason Carreira wrote:
> Before CommandDriven we were doing things like putting hidden
> form fields in our forms so our Actions could know whether the form had
> been submitted or if we were just drawing the form the first time.
I don't understand this argument. Even with CommandDriven you need the
form parameter to trigger the command, whether it is a submit button or
a hidden field, right? All CommandDriven saves is the need to switch on
the command in your execute method. If you're alluding to the "!foo"
syntax, I think that can be handled in xwork via action mapping
parameters.
Personally I don't think it is that much more convenient, especially if
you have a CommandDrivenInterceptor available, or even just a simple
utility method that people could call:
private String command;
public void setCommand(String command) {
this.command = command;
}
public String execute() {
return CommandDriven.execute(this, command);
}
public String doFoo() { ... }
public String doBar() { ... }
Wouldn't it be easier to document/support if execute() is always the
entry point to an Action? I see a lot of questions on this list which
require asking "are you extending ActionSupport?" because it has so much
going on beyond a vanilla Action.
-Chris
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: SlickEdit Inc. Develop an edge.
The most comprehensive and flexible code editor you can use.
Code faster. C/C++, C#, Java, HTML, XML, many more. FREE 30-Day Trial.
www.slickedit.com/sourceforge
_______________________________________________
Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
