|
From: Ken K. <kk...@kk...> - 2003-07-16 16:44:46
|
Thomas, I'll address your concern in the tutorial narrative. I suppose I ought to put some notes in the code too. Thanks again for your probing comments. Ken pr...@se... wrote: >Your reasoning (and Rod/Juergen's) makes perfect sense, and a quick look at >the source confirms the "bad smells" you mentioned. I know how a manager >feels now, asking a question based on incomplete info (I commented based on >the "design" I saw by the class names, and didn't actually dig into the code) >that is usually a very well-thought out decision by the programmer. "The >programmers always right" :) , I was just a little quick (and pointy-haired) >for a few minutes last night! > >My biggest concern seeing those changes was that our samples will be used by >many as a model of how to design their programs using Spring, and it may >appear to many that a Spring best-practice is to merge the business object >with the persistence object. While it makes perfect sense in this case (due >to the reasons you identified), it is not totally clear why this decision was >made by looking at the code. We should probably document why this code is >done this way to help newbies understand that this a solution to this specific >problem (and not necessarily the "normal" way for most apps). Documenting it >will also prevent somebody (like me) who isn't familiar with the history and >design decisions from changing it back to how it was before. > > >Great work, >Trevor > > > > >------------------------------------------------------- >This SF.net email is sponsored by: VM Ware >With VMware you can run multiple operating systems on a single machine. >WITHOUT REBOOTING! Mix Linux / Windows / Novell virtual machines at the >same time. Free trial click here: http://www.vmware.com/wl/offer/345/0 >_______________________________________________ >Springframework-developer mailing list >Spr...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer > > > > |