On Sun, 2006-04-30 at 20:33 -0500, Joe Germuska wrote: > At 5:10 PM -0700 4/30/06, David Evans wrote: > >below... > > > >On Sun, 2006-04-30 at 17:47 -0500, Joe Germuska wrote: > >> On 4/30/06, Caroline Jen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >I have seen some discussions on this forum regarding > >> >action chaining. Primarily, the advices are to think > >> >through the business logic before making decision on > >> >chaining actions. > >> > > >> >What are the disadvantages of action chaining? Why > >> >action chaining is not a good practice? > >> > >> http://wiki.apache.org/struts/ActionChaining > >> > >> As noted in that page, ActionChaining is using Struts in a way which > >> often works, but for which it was not specifically designed. It's > >> possible that you might run into some odd situations where the > >> assumption that a single HttpRequest results in only a single pass > >> through the RequestProcessor causes something to go wrong. > >> > >> I usually just refactor my app when I find myself wanting to use > >> action chaining, but many people just do it and find that it works. > >> > >> Joe > > > >How do you handle the population of the contexts which are passed to the > >jsp to which you are forwarding? > >... > >Is there a reason you don't use the two action (setup and submit) > >approach? > > The reason I don't is because I know that the original design of the > RequestProcessor didn't expect there to be two passes through in a > single request, so that it's possible (in theory) for some values to > be in unexpected state. Having known that, i've just developed > design strategies which don't require chaining. > > We use Tiles in every webapp we do, so I have often used Tiles > Controller classes for view population; I've also designed a few > strategies implemented with changes to the RequestProcessor (or with > custom chain commands since struts-chain) -- but none of which I felt > were clearly something which should be committed to Struts proper. > > I know for a fact that many people have used action chaining (and I > have at times too) and it hasn't been a problem. I can't cite > specific problems people have raised in the past that traced back to > action chaining, but maybe there's something in the archives. > > So it's not so much that ActionChaining is considered "harmful" as > it's understood to be potentially surprising. > > Hope that helps > Joe
Thanks it does help. I'm in the "gather as many ideas as possible stage", so thanks. dave --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
