I'd love to see something like this for Struts 2. Take a look at the
XmlConfigurationProvider and see how you could improve it to add this
functionality. Please let us know how it goes.
Don
On 11/2/06, Mike Baroukh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi.
I don't know if this post is on the right place.
I wanted to speak about a method I use to build my struts2 (but I was
doing the same with struts1 ...) configuration file.
This to :
- share my experience
- eventually have any comment that tell me why I'm totally wrong.
- eventually, have any return from struts2 developpers who think this
way to do could be incorporated in struts2 ...
I build web application in a developper team.
Once, I said to me that struts1/2 configuration file is not enough
modular and boring to do (especially with tiles !).
I also thought that there was not enough check or constraints :
- no check for class or view existence.
- no way to say that this 'pool' of actions MUST herite from this class
or implements that interface
So I made my struts configbuilder.
Here is an example of what it does :
<struts>
<package name="packagename" >
<action name="affichePrestation" class="MyActionAction">
<result name="success">view.jsp</result>
</action>
</package>
</struts>
wich reside in package "mymodule" is automatically included in the
package "packagename" loaded before (so benefit of interceptors,
extends, ...) and action is converted to
<action name="affichePrestation" class="mymodule.MyActionAction">
<result name="success">/WEB-INF/classes/mymodule/view.jsp</result>
</action>
As you can see :
- packages with the same name are "aggregated"
- class names are automatically expanded
- view names are automatically expanded too.
Also, I if use tiles, jsp name is automatically replaced with a
generated tiles name that is automatically created and incorporated in
the main tiles config file.
For views, you can see that I used to put jsps in the same package of
actions. this way
- it's much, much simplier.
- jsps are accessible via /WEB-INF/classes/<packagename>/
- action + config + jsp = a sort of component : I can, for example,
refactor and change package name. My component will continue to work
correctly without having to change anything.
I suppose that there must be a lot of people who will think that this
way to do is "bad", but what I can say is that applications are much
more easy to write and much more easy to maintain. I do that from about
2 years now and I had no problem on any application server I use (resin,
tomcat, weblogic, websphere, jboss ...).
In fact, it's simple, but helps a lot when writing web applications.
Mike
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
