Re: AW: Struts Approach

2005-02-28 Thread Mike Millson
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 12:27, Shey Rab Pawo wrote: > > On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 11:40:13 -0500, Mike Millson > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 10:22, Tim Christopher wrote: > > > So what you're saying is that if I include a separate DTO it doesn't > > > really achieve anything extra

Re: AW: Struts Approach

2005-02-28 Thread Shey Rab Pawo
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 11:40:13 -0500, Mike Millson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 10:22, Tim Christopher wrote: > > So what you're saying is that if I include a separate DTO it doesn't > > really achieve anything extra - whilst at the same time creating more > > code to maintain

Re: AW: Struts Approach

2005-02-28 Thread Mike Millson
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 10:22, Tim Christopher wrote: > So what you're saying is that if I include a separate DTO it doesn't > really achieve anything extra - whilst at the same time creating more > code to maintain and reducing performance? Yes, that's what I think. > > Do you know if there is a

Re: AW: Struts Approach

2005-02-28 Thread Dakota Jack
Here is the general notes on when a DTO is needed: Every method call made to the business service object, be it an entity bean or a session bean, is potentially remote. Thus, in an Enterprise JavaBeans (EJB) application such remote invocations use the network layer regardless of the proximity of t

Re: AW: Struts Approach

2005-02-28 Thread Dakota Jack
DTOs are meant for efficient Internet transfers of data in a J2EE environment. If you don't have the problem that DTOs were meant to solve, then you should not be using them. Jack On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 15:22:28 +, Tim Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So what you're saying is that if I

Re: AW: Struts Approach

2005-02-28 Thread Larry Meadors
I would agree with that point. Generally, my service classes take care of the domain logic, so the DTO is as good a DO as I need. Larry On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 15:22:28 +, Tim Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So what you're saying is that if I include a separate DTO it doesn't > really

Re: AW: Struts Approach

2005-02-28 Thread Tim Christopher
So what you're saying is that if I include a separate DTO it doesn't really achieve anything extra - whilst at the same time creating more code to maintain and reducing performance? Do you know if there is a formal writeup of what is in the blog, something article in a book / report or on a differ

Re: AW: Struts Approach

2005-02-27 Thread Mike Millson
On Sat, 2005-02-26 at 11:26, Tim Christopher wrote: > > I'm also a little concerned that my domain object (Customer.java) is > also my DTO - is this good practice? Take a look at the following article: http://www.javaperformancetuning.com/news/roundup050.shtml I think the author makes a good poi

Re: AW: AW: Struts Approach

2005-02-26 Thread Craig McClanahan
On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 06:24:06 -0700, Larry Meadors <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 14:13:59 +0100, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hmm, i thought it's more or less standart for interfaces in the advanced > > java community... > > > > Baloney. > > HttpServletRequest? HttpServletResp

Re: AW: Struts Approach

2005-02-26 Thread Tim Christopher
> I put a nested Customer object in my action form, and deal with type > conversions from the web layer there (i.e., dates, numbers, etc) so > that by the time my action gets involved, it can get the customer from > the form and pass it to the service layer without worrying too much > about that st

Re: AW: AW: Struts Approach

2005-02-26 Thread Larry Meadors
> this will sure make it more readable... > > And it's not hungarian since "Interface" is not a type. > > Regards > Leon > > > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- > > Von: Larry Meadors [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Gesendet: Samstag, 26. Febr

AW: AW: Struts Approach

2005-02-26 Thread Leon Rosenberg
nd "I" this will sure make it more readable... And it's not hungarian since "Interface" is not a type. Regards Leon > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- > Von: Larry Meadors [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Gesendet: Samstag, 26. Februar 2005 14:06 > An:

AW: AW: Struts Approach

2005-02-26 Thread Leon Rosenberg
nd "I" this will sure make it more readable... And it's not hungarian since "Interface" is not a type. Regards Leon > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- > Von: Larry Meadors [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Gesendet: Samstag, 26. Februar 2005 14:06 > An:

Re: AW: Struts Approach

2005-02-26 Thread Larry Meadors
Couldn't disagree more. ;-) IMO, adding hungarian notation like that to a Java project is pointless. What's next? sCustomerName? iCusomerId? Nonsense. Leave that for C coders. :-D Larry On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 13:58:41 +0100, Leon Rosenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > <2cents> > The inter

AW: Struts Approach

2005-02-26 Thread Leon Rosenberg
<2cents> > for the application CustomerService.java - the interface for > the service layer CustomerServiceImpl.java - the The interface should start with an 'I' -> ICustomerService, and you also need a CustomerServiceFactory to create/retrieve/manager CustomerServiceImpl instances :-)

AW: Struts Approach

2005-02-26 Thread Leon Rosenberg
<2cents> > for the application CustomerService.java - the interface for > the service layer CustomerServiceImpl.java - the The interface should start with an 'I' -> ICustomerService, and you also need a CustomerServiceFactory to create/retrieve/manager CustomerServiceImpl instances :-)