cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Mazzocchi <stef...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Are Actions Redundant in a Flowscript world?
Date Fri, 04 Apr 2003 20:33:09 GMT
Tony Collen wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Apr 2003, Richard In Public wrote:
> 
> 
>>2.  If this is the case, then I am left wondering about ACTIONS: would one
>>still want to use, for example, database actions in the sitemap, rather than
>>calling a persistence layer from within the flowscript?
> 
> 
> 
> Funny, I was just contemplating accessing a database from the Flow, but
> I'm not sure if it's not implemented for a reason, or what.  Any
> suggestions would be helpful.

Chris implemented database connection directly into the flow object 
model in the scratchpad. checkout the petstore example.

I personally think that adding more stuff to the flow object model is 
dangerous, since javascript doesn't really shine on its object 
orientation (compared to java, anyway) as it doesn't have direct 
polymorphism. (you have to use the *.prototype object which is not as 
easy to use and can be abused a lot).

I would suggest to reuse more and more the tons of components that 
cocoon already has. actions, input and output modules, for example, or 
even a collection of generally useful avalon components.

for example user storage, database store, and so on. Avalon already 
includes a bunch of them to be used in phoenix.

But first of all we should release 2.1 and make the flow available for 
people to work with it.

*then* we will have enough first-hand information on how is best to move on.

-- 
Stefano.



Mime
View raw message