On 7/5/05, Rick Reumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Michael Jouravlev wrote the following on 7/5/2005 1:41 PM: > > You want to have your TOs populated by Struts? Why would not you just > > make FatherTO as a member of ActionForm, and use it as nested > > property? If you want to retain TO values between requests, set form > > scope to "session". > > Yup. This is what I do. Which ends up making you wonder why do you > really need an ActionForm at all:) Just have your TO(s)/ValueObjec(s) as > your ActionForm property(ies). > > The only drawback, of course, to the above is validation. That can get a > bit messy if you want to use the struts validation stuff (I'm not even > sure if it's possible?)... but since I don't use it, I don't see much > problem using your Value Objects directly as ActionForm properties. > > (If I need validation I call my own validation method which validate the > nested VOs.)
Struts needs two improvements: * populate properties of an arbitrary bean instead of populating subclass of ActionForm; * dispatch request directly into the form bean, so I could return a mapping from a form bean instead of defining near-empty action class for that. A form bean with session scope and with handler methods allows to create a stateful object like JSF backing bean. For some reason putting methods in a form bean is frown upon, but actually it is a great thing. Validation... I think it should be done in the business/persistence layer, because application can have other front ends besides Struts. On the other hand, all request parameters are strings, so TO/VO/BO has to accept strings and to validate them. Validating input in a form bean works only for simple apps. <OT> What do you call a pattern when you use detached business objects as transfer objects? </OT> Michael. -- Dialogs for Struts http://struts.sourceforge.net/strutsdialogs --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
