Dion Gillard wrote:
On 3/31/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I am sorry you took this personally, Dion. I meant nothing about you
personally. I am just saying that what you are advocating is well-known
in
the literature and in fact to be a problem. This is a main reason why
Struts 1.x is being abandoned. I am not going to take the time to show
you
something that you should be learning as a matter of course. I don't owe
you that. So far as I know you may be the most wonderful person in the
world. Nothing personal is meant. Just read more. That is all I am
saying. Just because you don't see something does not mean I have the
obligation to teach you. I have told you the truth. Check it out.
Dion,
Finally, I was curious about this question and I just googled the keywords:
webwork struts testable
as well as: webwork struts "unit test"
and I get a fair number of hits. You might try similar searches. There
seem to be various people who think that a significant advantage of
Webwork is testability -- that actions are testable independently of the
web container.
Here is one blogger who talks about this stuff extensively.
http://www.pubbitch.org/blog/2004/10/10/every_time_you_use_struts_god_kills_another_kitten
So, it seems that, at least there are many people who believe that
Webwork has a significant advantage in terms of being able to unit test
actions.
OTOH, I personally don't have a sense of how important this aspect of
things was in the overall Struts vs. Webwork comparison that must have
been carried out in order to decide to ditch the Struts codebase in
favor of WW.
Most of the basis of my discourse on this -- that Webwork is better than
Struts -- has been simply taking the Struts people at their word. Why on
earth would they want to bring in Webwork as Struts Action 2 if it were
not significantly better than Struts Action 1 (i.e. plain old Struts)?
At this point, strangely enough, certain people are asking *me*
insistently about all these issues as if I am the one who is supposed to
explain it.
Anyway, there does seem to be an issue that Webwork has an advantage in
that the actions are unit testable independently of a web container. I
do not know how central this was to the decision to bring in Webwork.
There is terrible communication about this from the Struts developers
themselves. You'd think they would feel some onus to answer such
questions. If there are 22 Struts committers who had a say in the
decision to go with WW, you'd think they wouldn't all go into hiding
when questions are asked about this stuff.
Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
Your original statement I replied to was:
"For one, try writing decent tests."
Believe it or not, I have done a lot of reading on Struts, been developing
with Struts for many years (I think it was 1999, in the 0.5 days) and
understand what it takes to test Struts code very well. I've written Struts
and WebWork apps, and tests for both, many times.
I'm not asking you to teach me anything.
IMHO, you can write decent tests for Struts applications. And I'm happy to
agree to disagree with you.
On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ah, personal attack, thanks.
I wouldn't want people to think that it's not possible to write decent
tests
with Struts 1.x.
It is.
On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sigh ...... Dion, I am sorry, but I am not going to stoop this
low. Come
back later when you are grown up in this business. I hate to do this
but
I
am not going to start at 101 with you. Someone else can. I am not
going
to. You DON'T have a clue about these issues and don't even realize
that
you are revealing that in spades. Please do yourself a favor and bow
out
gracefully.
On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dion, you are obviously really green. Please read a bit and then
come
back. Do you have any idea about architecture and design and
testing
issues?
Yes, I do. Do you?
So, the use of StrutsTestCase has an effect on architecture and
design?
Are you saying you can't test your code using it? I seem to do it
reasonably
easily.
On 3/29/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 3/30/06, Dakota Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
God, Joe! If you don't know what is wrong with Struts 1.xthen
stand
aside. For one, try writing decent tests. Do you test your
code?
So StrutsTestCase doesn't help you?
On 3/29/06, Joe Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jonathon,
You didn't answer Dion's question. You merely summarized
that
Struts
and
WebWork merged.
You did not state any technical reasons that Struts 1.x is
wrong.
The question was "Do you have a list of
things that are technically wrong with Struts 1.x?"
You complain that people don't answer questions on this list
and
look
what
you've just done.
So do you have an answer?
You should not use me as some kind of scapegoat to take out
your
frustrations on. Take this stuff up with the Struts PMC,
not
with me. >Jonathan Revusky
Very unbecoming of you Jon. Stop trying to change the
subject
and
answer
the question.The question is:
"Do you have a list of things that are technically wrong
with
Struts
1.x
?"
Joe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on
its
back."
~Dakota Jack~
--
http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris
is
afraid
of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris
--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
back."
~Dakota Jack~
--
http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is
afraid
of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris
--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its
back."
~Dakota Jack~
--
http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is
afraid
of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris
--
"You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back."
~Dakota Jack~
--
http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is afraid
of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
