----- Original Message ----- From: "Sloan Seaman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Struts Users Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Jing Zhou" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Struts Users Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 10:11 AM Subject: Re: Why not to use Action chaining ?
> Though that is true, it can be avoid if you write your chainer properly. > > You can have it "Dechain" and actually invoke a forward to the new action. > > Also, you can write an Action that just invokes objects in a linked list > mannor and have each action called that way. > > There are really lots of options for chaining.... > > As stated in an email a week or so ago, I have a system that does all of the > above and more but I'm still trying to get permission from my company to > release it :( It is a known issue that many high quality codes can not be released due to company's policies :-( As an algorithm engineer and researcher, I have published algorithms in IEEE transactions and received one U.S patent some years ago (not related to web) Now I regard the web development process as a big *algorithm*, so Carrier is created with open source codes for mission critical components. You could find the Controller Delegation Model in its source codes now :-) at http://www.netspread.com The way Craig interprets the MVC pattern is actually a big algorithm in my opinion. It inspires me to further simplify the whole algorithm. You could find many other small algorithms I wrote. For example, the concept of runtime property names for form bean models. The path to the property of a nested form bean could be adapted if its containing form bean is changed. It is this enabling technique that I use to create the general purpose CRUD algorithm. You are going to find a lot of new ideas in its source codes. What you couldn't find is the dead-dear-without-eyes :-) > > -- > Sloan > Jing Netspread Carrier http://www.netspread.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Siva" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Jing Zhou" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Struts Users Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 10:28 AM > Subject: Re: Why not to use Action chaining ? > > > > thanks a lot Jing Zhou, > > I will try this . > > > > Siva > > > > Jing Zhou wrote: > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Siva" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: "Struts Users Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 5:14 AM > > > Subject: Re: Why not to use Action chaining ? > > > > > > > Thanks Alen, > > > > > > > > Ted Husted (Struts in Action) says that the action chaining in the > dark > > > side > > > > of Struts. > > > > > > > > The problem he mentioned is that > > > > > > > > "when the second action is being invoked, the form is being > 'repopulated' > > > > with the initial form values that the form had when it was passed to > the > > > > first action " > > > > > > > > Since I am new to struts, I am not able to grasp it clearly. You can > find > > > the > > > > info related to this in Struts FAQ. I am just wondering what is the > > > alternate > > > > solution. > > > > > > There are two alternatives to my knowledge: > > > > > > 1) Refactoring Design: > > > Put common functions into a separate class and then > > > call the common functions from your action classes if you need. > > > > > > 2) Controller Delegation Model: > > > In one action class, you could find another action instance the > > > same way as the RequestProcessor find it and then call the > > > execute method on the action instance. > > > > > > The second way is very suitable for tools when designers could > > > organize their actions without any overlap functions. The performance > > > gain is apparent: no repopulated, no revalidated form beans. > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks again, > > > > siva > > > > > > > > > > Jing > > > Netspread Carrier > > > http://www.netspread.com > > > > > > > > > > > Alen Ribic wrote: > > > > > > > > > Maybe I haven't came across this before or I don't understand but > why > > > > > wouldn't you wanna use action chaining? > > > > > I just jump from one action to another until I have all client > requested > > > > > baggage. > > > > > --Alen > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > From: "Siva" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 11:54 AM > > > > > Subject: Why not to use Action chaining ? > > > > > > > > > > > Friends, > > > > > > > > > > > > Could anyone of you tell me why we ahuld not use Action chaining > in > > > > > > struts framework ? > > > > > > I neet to do two different actions for a user action. how can i > > > wachieve > > > > > > it without action chaining? > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance for your help. > > > > > > > > > > > > Sivakumar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email > Security System. For more information on a proactive email security > service working around the clock, around the globe, visit > http://www.messagelabs.com > ________________________________________________________________________ > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
