> From: David Morris
> 
> You are saying "STOP USING STRUTS" but I think you
> are misinterpreting Craig McClanahan. Did you ask
> him about if this is his position before sending it to this
> list?

I quoted what he said, but I overemphasized I guess.  He said "stop
using the struts tag library".  You can make your own conclusions.  I
really do understand the difference you're getting at, but it seems to
me the majority of Struts programmers and texts and tutorials always
start at the View level, usually using the Struts taglib.  Of course,
now that's deprecated and you should be using JSTL/JSF, except that's
not available yet.  So in the meantime, maybe use Turbine or ...

Ahh, the joys of Open Source - pick a bunch of pieces, and hope they
continue to work together next year.  Heck, hope they're all still
AROUND next year.


> That statement summarizes what I have been trying to tell
> you about Struts. It is the architecture that provides value,
> not the view implementation.

The View is the only part of Struts I find necessary, and Struts'
requirement of named mapping is too restrictive (although I do like the
fact that it handles a String map, which is the only reason I can use it
with PSC/400).

If you aren't programming in MVC already (via solid JSP Model II), then
maybe you need the training wheels Struts provides.  But there is
nothing in the architecture of the Struts controller that can't be
implemented more cleanly in a simple JSP Model II architecture.  There's
not much in Struts I like, especially the struts-config.xml file, and
frankly I like the Tapestry architecture better - it's closer to an
architecture than a macro language.


> The Struts tag library, or any
> tag library are not a core value of Struts. However, Struts
> works well with tags, which allow some level of encapsulation
> above that offered by raw scriptlets.

Your whole argument against JSP is you hate scriptlets, and taglibs
remove scriptlets, but taglibs aren't important.  Okay, I'm lost.


Obviously you love Struts.  You love the ActionForm and the DynaForm and
that lovely mapping.  Me, I can take it or leave it.  I've never been a
big fan of JavaBeans; they get overused.  They unnecessarily expose a
lot of stuff that doesn't need to be exposed, unless you create a unique
bean for every view. If that's your design, then cool!

My point is that it is no way a panacaea, and just having Struts in your
application doesn't make it better, or worse.  It's just another tool.

Joe


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2022 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.