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