-1 Same reasons. Ara Abrahamian wrote: > -1, but I don't veto. If ppl are happy with it then I'm happy as far as > it's compatible with classic ejb:transaction stuff. > > I prefer the familiar/standard terms. It seems to be just a synonym. So > many ways to do the same thing is bad. > > Ara. > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:xdoclet-user- >>[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Aslak Helles�y >>Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 9:14 AM >>To: Paul Cantrell; [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Subject: RE: [Xdoclet-user] A clarifying extension for ejb:transaction >> >>Hi Paul, >> >>If it's really backwards compatible, I like it. Upload it to patches > > (make > >>sure it's patched against latest CVS). If we accept it we'll apply it. > > If > >>not, we'll throw it away. >> >>+1 >> >>Aslak >> >> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Paul >>>Cantrell >>>Sent: 14. juni 2002 00:06 >>>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>Subject: [Xdoclet-user] A clarifying extension for ejb:transaction >>> >>> >>>I made a mod to the ejb:transaction tag that I thought others >>>might be interested in, so I'm describing it here for discussion. >>> >>>I've always been really bothered by the EJB terminology for >>>transaction types. Quick, what's the difference between >>>"Required" and "Mandatory"? "NotSupported" and "Never"? OK, I >>>know the answers, and so do you, probably -- but being used to >>>it doesn't make the terminology any less horrid. And bad >>>terminology can really thwart the high-level discussion and >>>analysis the EJBs are supposed to make easier. >>> >>>So, I added support for a clearer alternative. With the patch, >>>instead of this: >>> >>> @ejb:transaction >>> type="Supports" >>> >>>...you can specify the rules in a much more comprehensible way, >>>specifying the action to take depending on whether a transaction >>>is present or absent in the current context: >>> >>> @ejb:transaction >>> present="use" >>> absent="ignore" >>> >>>It's backward-compatible -- either way works -- you can specify >>>either "type" or the "present" / "absent" pair (but not both) in >>>your ejb:transaction tag. The allowable values for the "present" >>>attribute are: ignore, use, create, and error; "absent" is the >>>same, except it doesn't allow "use" because it wouldn't have any >>>meaning. >>> >>>The modified tag handler will translate the present/absent pair >>>into the appropriate EJB transaction type, or give an error if >>>you choose a combination not allowed by the spec. The full >>>translation table is as follows: >>> >>> absent / present => type >>> ---------------------------------- >>> ignore / ignore => NotSupported >>> ignore / use => Supports >>> create / use => Required >>> create / create => RequiresNew >>> error / use => Mandatory >>> ignore / error => Never >>> >>>Now I think this is cool, and am pleased with its effect on my >>>code's readability. Questions: Is this a patch others would >>>like? Do people have suggestions for improvement? Might we >>>consider adding this as a standard feature of ejbdoclet? >>> >>>If there is interest on this list, I'll send my code out. >>> >>>Cheers, >>> >>>Paul >>> >>> >>>_______________________________________________________________ >>> >>>Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference >>>August 25-28 in Las Vegas - >> >>http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm?source=dntextlink >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Xdoclet-user mailing list >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xdoclet-user >> >> >>_______________________________________________________________ >> >>Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference >>August 25-28 in Las Vegas - >>http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm?source=dntextlink >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Xdoclet-user mailing list >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xdoclet-user > > > > _______________________________________________________________ > > Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference > August 25-28 in Las Vegas - http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm?source > _______________________________________________ > Xdoclet-user mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xdoclet-user
_______________________________________________________________ Sponsored by: ThinkGeek at http://www.ThinkGeek.com/ _______________________________________________ Xdoclet-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xdoclet-user
