I looked into Seam and IMO, it's a bit too intrusive on the session beans and really sort of blurs the line between your presentation and other app layers....though it obviously makes life easy. I just didn't care for it (compared to Wicket, which is quite elegant.)
If I'm using detached models and then merge them back into the persistence context after the form is submitted, I wouldn't have to worry about straggling sessions on my entities, would I? You'll have to forgive my ignorance, I just started using EJB3 about a week ago.
On 3/14/06, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 3/14/06, Vincent Jenks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Oh I see, I hadn't noticed that, sorry. So it's similar to the "managed
> bean" concept in JSF? That was one of the things I *didn't* like about JSF,
> actually.
I would say it is more like the value object pattern, where you have a
- usually shallow - copy of a domain object just for the purpose of
passing parameters (input output) around in the view layer. The
disadvantage of that pattern is that you'll get quite some code
duplication. The advantage is that you'll never have to worry about
things like the integrity of your domain objects and whether or not
they have stale Hibernate/ EJB3 sessions attached. The difference with
JSF is that we don't force you in having any such bean, and that
Wicket doesn't manage the beans you provide.
Eelco
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnk&kid0944&bid$1720&dat1642
_______________________________________________
Wicket-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
