Here's a specific case: A reservation system has the following actions, create, modify, cancel, and lookup a reservation. All of which reasonably have views. The modify view, however, can be created as a composite using the other three views.
Just like WW1.x allows me to embed actions within a page (even if they have views defined), so do I think that WW2.x should allow actions to be called from actions without additional configurations. My proposal is this: * add a scope="..." to the interceptor where ... may be either request or action. * by default all interceptors are scoped action (essentially the current behavior) * actions scoped as "request" are only executed on the outer action call If there's agreement, I'm more than happy to write this. -- Matt Ho Principal Indigo Egg, Inc. http://www.indigoegg.com/ > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Jason Carreira > Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 9:37 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [OS-webwork] XWork: calling Actions from Actions > > Or just one without the ResultInterceptor > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick Lightbody [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2003 12:34 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] XWork: calling Actions from Actions > > > > > > My answer to this is, rather than complicate xwork, why not > > just recommend that "actions-within-actions" not utilize > > actions that have views associated with them? > > > > If you want to re-use two action _classes_, just make two > > aliases for the same class, one that has the view and one > > that is used internally. > > > > -Pat > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Matt Ho" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 9:07 PM > > Subject: RE: [OS-webwork] XWork: calling Actions from Actions > > > > > > > There's another issue too to consider that Patrick just > > pointed out. > > > Because the page is rendered by the ResultInterceptor, calling an > > > action from an action means that if the inner action has a > > view, that > > > view will be rendered first and then the outer view will be render. > > > > > > We may want to consider giving Interceptors scope. A logic > > set would > > > be action scope and request scope so that 1 request may > > have multiple > > > actions. The ResultInterceptor could then be placed in the result > > > scope. > > > > > > Having the ResultInterceptor in the action scope is going to make > > > creating actions via composition difficult. > > > > > > -- > > > Matt Ho > > > Principal > > > Indigo Egg, Inc. > > > http://www.indigoegg.com/ > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > On Behalf > > > > Of Jason Carreira > > > > Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 8:43 PM > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Subject: RE: [OS-webwork] XWork: calling Actions from Actions > > > > > > > > You do this: > > > > > > > > ActionInvocation.java > > > > > > > > private ActionContext parentContext; > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > private void init() throws Exception { > > > > ... > > > > > > > > parentContext = ActionContext.getContext(); > > > > ActionContext context = new ActionContext(contextMap); > > > > ActionContext.setContext(context); > > > > > > > > ... > > > > } > > > > > > > > public String invoke() throws Exception { > > > > ... > > > > > > > > if (parentContext != null) { > > > > ActionContext.setContext(parentContext); > > > > } > > > > > > > > return result; > > > > } > > > > > > > > Which should reset the ActionContext if it was nested. > > > > > > > > My only question here is, which Servlet containers > > pooling threads, > > > will > > > > we get phantom ThreadLocals left over that get reset after the > > > > Action > > > is > > > > invoked? Also, if how can we reset the ActionContext at the right > > > spot? > > > > If we do it right after the Action is executed, then the > > > > Interceptors, on the way back out, in their after() methods, will > > > > have the wrong ActionContext. > > > > > > > > Jason > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Matt Ho [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 11:12 PM > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Subject: RE: [OS-webwork] XWork: calling Actions from Actions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Without a lock or other reference, how do you know that you're > > > > > executing the inner action rather than the outer action? > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Matt Ho > > > > > Principal > > > > > Indigo Egg, Inc. > > > > > http://www.indigoegg.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > On Behalf Of > > > > > > Patrick Lightbody > > > > > > Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 8:01 PM > > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] XWork: calling Actions from Actions > > > > > > > > > > > > We don't need locks, we just need ActionInvocation to > > keep track > > > of > > > > > the > > > > > > old > > > > > > ActionContext associated with the thread, and when an > > action is > > > done > > > > > being > > > > > > executed, re-set it. I'll make sure that > > Actions-within-Actions > > > > > > is supported properly. > > > > > > > > > > > > -Pat > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > From: "Matt Ho" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 7:53 PM > > > > > > Subject: RE: [OS-webwork] XWork: calling Actions from Actions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here's a simple sequence diagram to help illustrate > > the issue: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MyAction AnotherAction > > > > > > > | | > > > > > > > | | > > > > > > > exectute -->O | --- A > > > > > > > O | > > > > > > > O-- execute -->O --- B > > > > > > > O O > > > > > > > O O > > > > > > > O<-------------O --- C > > > > > > > O | > > > > > > > O | --- D > > > > > > > | | > > > > > > > | | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > With the current implementation of ActionContext as a > > > ThreadLocal, > > > > > if > > > > > > > you attempt to call an action from within an action, life > > > > > works well > > > > > > > until step C. Because step B sets the ActionContext, > > > > > when control > > > > > > > returns to MyAction at point C, the ActionContext > > is not what > > > you > > > > > > > expect. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Setting up the ActionContext during the invoke() could work: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > private static ThreadLocal lock ; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > static { > > > > > > > lock = new ThreadLocal() ; > > > > > > > lock.set(new Lock()) ; > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > public static class Lock { > > > > > > > private boolean locked = false; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > private boolean acquired() { > > > > > > > if( !locked ) { > > > > > > > return true; > > > > > > > } else { > > > > > > > return false; > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > private void release() { > > > > > > > locked = false; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > public void invoke() throws Exception { > > > > > > > Lock lock = (Lock)lock.get() ; > > > > > > > boolean haveLock = lock.acquire() ; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if( haveLock ) { > > > > > > > // nest storage > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > try { > > > > > > > ... execute my action > > > > > > > } finally { > > > > > > > lock.release() ; > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Matt Ho > > > > > > > Principal > > > > > > > Indigo Egg, Inc. > > > > > > > http://www.indigoegg.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > > > > Behalf Of > > > > > > > > Jason Carreira > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 7:18 PM > > > > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [OS-webwork] XWork: calling Actions from > > > > > > > > Actions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So it would nest it during init and unnest at the end of > > > invoke, > > > > > or > > > > > > > > when? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > From: Patrick Lightbody [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 8:05 PM > > > > > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] XWork: calling Actions from > > > Actions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Couldn't ActionInvocation just do nested storage of the > > > > > > > > > ActionContext, just like GenericDispatcher did? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Pat > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > > > > From: "Jason Carreira" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 12:20 PM > > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [OS-webwork] XWork: calling Actions from > > > Actions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Patrick, this came up while you were gone. > > Did you have > > > any > > > > > > > > > thoughts > > > > > > > > > > on this? In order to be able to do this easily, we'd > > > > > > > > > > need > > > > > > > > > to pull the > > > > > > > > > > ActionContext initialization out of the > > ActionInvocation > > > > > > > > > > initialization, so you can use one ActionContext > > > > > for multiple > > > > > > > > > > invocations. Matt didn't like the option where you do: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ActionContext myContext = ActionContext.getContext(); > > > > > > > > > ActionInvocation > > > > > > > > > > anotherInvocation = new > > > > > > > > > > ActionInvocation("someNamespace","anotherAction"); > > > > > > > > > > String otherResult = anotherInvocation.invoke(); > > > > > > > > > > ActionContext.setContext(myContext); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which would be needed to save the current context, > > > > > then re-set > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > after invoking the other action... This is not really > > > > > > > > > pretty, but as > > > > > > > > > > I'm thinking about it, it could be a helper method in > > > > > > > > > ActionSupport... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jason > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > 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/o> > > > > > pensymphony-webwork > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > 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-webwor > > > > > > k > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > 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-webw > ork > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > 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 > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > 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 > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > 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 ------------------------------------------------------- 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
