RE : [Springframework-developer] Petclinic, skeletons, and sample apps

[Jean-Pierre <jp...@jp...>]

In both cases (Internal and RessourceBundle), you are not forced to =
"hardcode" as the Controller can easily take properties defined in its =
configuration like formView, successView, searchView, etc .

My general approach is to hardcode a default value for the view(s), but =
defining (a) setter(s) to be able to redefine the view(s) without code =
change. As long as the default value can be used, the configuration can =
omit to set the property and be less verbose. But it's always possible =
to change the view name either in the configuration file either its =
default value in the code.

Jean-Pierre

-----Message d'origine-----
De : spr...@li... =
[mailto:spr...@li...] De la =
part de j=C3=BCrgen h=C3=B6ller [werk3AT]
Envoy=C3=A9 : vendredi 29 ao=C3=BBt 2003 23:35
=C3=80 : Lars Fischer
Cc : kk...@kk...; spr...@li...; =
spr...@li...
Objet : Re: [Springframework-developer] Petclinic, skeletons, and sample =
apps

The controller must specify the name of the view somehow, so you must at =
least give some kind of symbolic name... That's the difference between =
the default InternalResourceViewResolver and the =
ResourceBundleViewResolver: The former interprets the view names as full =
JSP paths (not really symbolic, but easy for prototyping), while the =
latter maps symbolic view names to any kind of view instances =
(introducing a level of indirection).
=20
I prefer to give the name of a view instead of a constant like SUCCESS =
in WebWork style. You can always name views after controllers, e.g. =
"productSearchSuccess" for a "productSearch" controller, if you'd like =
to imitate that style.
=20
Juergen
=20
=20

	-----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Nachricht-----=20
	Von: Lars Fischer [mailto:lar...@gm...]=20
	Gesendet: Fr 29.08.2003 22:34=20
	An: j=C3=BCrgen h=C3=B6ller [werk3AT]=20
	Cc: kk...@kk...; spr...@li...; =
spr...@li...=20
	Betreff: Re: [Springframework-developer] Petclinic, skeletons, and =
sample apps
=09
=09

	I must admit, that I didn't ...
	Looked at hibernate, typical, Petclinic and Countries,
	maybe I should take a look at the minimal configuration too.
=09
	Now let's assume that I use all the configuration stuff like
	viewResolver, urlMapping, xxxMethodNameResolver and
	even a views.properties file. Is it really necessary to hardcode
	the name of the view in the controller ?
=09
	If this ist not the case please just tell me because I didn't check if
	it is really necessary :-)
=09
	Thanks,
	Lars
=09
=09
=09
=09
	> > One thing I'd like to be improved in Spring (not Petcli
	> nic) is the configuration of the MVC part. It seems just
	> too much to configure.
	>
	> Have you had a look at the weba
	> pp-minimal skeleton? If you rely on the default handler m
	> apping and default view resolution, you don't need to def
	> ine anything but your controllers. No need for framework
	> beans, no need for views.properties. Just give your contr
	> oller beans their URLs as alias names, and return paths t
	> o your JSPs as view names. Have a look at example-servlet
	> .xml in the samples/skeletons/webapp-minimal/WEB-INF dire
	> ctory.
	>
	> I agree that there are a lot of configuration o
	> ptions in the web framework. I've tried to hard to provid
	> e sensible defaults, though.
	>
	> Juergen
	>
	>
=09
=09

N=18 =E9=9A=8AX'u=DE=BC)=19 Y\g=E9=A2=AD
=17 =7F b=D8=9EH=1EzG(J=20
jg=EB=B0=A2=1Dz=ED=BD=96=ED=B2=97x%R=CB=A6 (G^=EC=AE=BDh  lq=20
zm=D8=B6?X (=1E~zw X b=CB=9D?=20
jg=EB=B0=A2=1Dz=ED=BD=96=ED=B2=97