This is more, not less, code, is it not? You have:
<setupItem setupClass="com.omnytex.setupexample.setups.SetupClass1"
> setupMethod="setupMethod1" />
which has to be used for all actions that use this, right?
compared to:
SetupClass1.setupMethod1(request)
I don't see the "less code" point. Looks like more code to me, but
just a different kind of code.
This is also only achieved at the expense of reflection, etc. I don't
see the advantage at all so far. I am probably missing the point. I
tend to think that Struts has about the right complications with the
declarative options available. More, I think, might not be good. I
probably am missing the point, however.
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 14:29:08 -0500 (EST), Frank W. Zammetti
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Now, as you were saying, you could just use this class from the Actions
> manually, that works fine, and plenty of people do that. But, it's extra
> code, and redundant code if used in more than one Action, even if the
> redundant code amounts to:
>
> SetupClass1.setupMethod1(request);
>
> (assuming its a static method).
>
> Instead, my proposal, and what I posted to Buzilla accomplishes this, is
> to allow this:
>
> <action path="/page1" type="com.omnytex.setupexample.action.TestAction">
> <forward name="defaultForward" path="/result.jsp">
> <setupItem setupClass="com.omnytex.setupexample.setups.SetupClass1"
> setupMethod="setupMethod1" />
> </forward>
> </action>
>
--
No one ever went blind looking at the bright side of life.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
