commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Craig R. McClanahan" <craig...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [Chain] DTD, Design Considerations, etc. (was Re: [Chain] examples XML file available?)
Date Fri, 26 Sep 2003 16:21:32 GMT
Ted Husted wrote:

> Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
>
>> Far better would be to divide the procedural flow into small steps 
>> that are externally configurable.  And, let each step have its own 
>> arbitrarily complex internal structure (by virtue of the fact that it 
>> can be a Command or a Chain of its own).  Oh, by the way, the 
>> procedural steps become small enough and narrowly focused enough to 
>> write high quality unit tests for.  And, because commands interact 
>> with each other *solely* through a Context, you can easily create 
>> mock objects (like a ServletContext or an HttpSession, in a chain 
>> destined for a web applicaton) that let you thoroughly test things in 
>> a standalone environment (in case it's not obvious, I'm a *huge* fan 
>> of JUnit :-).
>
>
> Me too. =:) Right now, I've got my DAO layer (which also uses a XML 
> config) running under the JUnit applet or as an Ant task. I can't seem 
> to get Chain running that way. It's fine as an Ant task, but when I 
> try to run it under the applet, my Commands table comes up empty =:(
>
> Obviously, I need to define this better, provide a demnstration 
> environment, but I thought I'd bring this up in case anyone had a clue 
> for a quick fix. [That green bar is soooo addictive :)]

Doesn't sound familiar, but use the Ant task variant myself.  Perhaps a 
class loader problem; perhaps related to the XML parsing?

>
> Though, my unit tests for the Commands don't utilize mocks. They just 
> populate the Context directly and pass it up. Of course, there's the 
> part where the Context is created from the request paramenters, but 
> that's a separate test suite that isn't coupled to the Commands.

That's the approach I take as well.

>
> For end-to-end integration, Cannoo Webtest pulls it all together 
> nicely. Need to run the container running for that one, but it doesn't 
> involve loading Cactus or anything like that, so those run very quickly.

For web stuff in particular, I've also found HtmlUnit to be quite 
helpful -- it lets you treat the response page as a DOM and look for 
various things, without the fragility of comparisons to a static golden 
file that is sensitive to changes in whitespace that are not usually 
important.

>
>
>> Indeed, the only reason that Catalog exists is to allow chains to 
>> refer to other chains in an organized way.  One could argue that even 
>> this is out of scope; however, it's very useful to be able to write a 
>> Command that uses complex processing logic to decide which other 
>> commands (or chains, since you can't tell in the catalog what 
>> something is) should be used to actually perform a task.
>
>
> IMHO, the Catalog construct places a key role in decoupling the sender 
> from receiver, as specified by the CoR pattern. Right now, I have a 
> command-name coming up from the web tier. The presentation framework 
> requesting the command has no idea how it will be handled. It just 
> knows how to create a given Context for a given Command, according to 
> a high-level API contract. All it really knows is the logical name and 
> parameters required. The Catalog takes care of selecting the 
> Command/Chain to process, in much the same way a framework like Struts 
> takes care of selecting the Action class to execute.
>
> If an implementation exposes the Catalog to the Command/Chains, then 
> another usage is to allow Commands to call one another through the 
> Catalog. As mentioned, this allows any number of clever strategies for 
> creating "framework" chains that can be reused in different ways under 
> different circumstances. This usage can also make the Catalogs more 
> testable, since a test could substitute a "mock" Command, if such a 
> thing were desired.

Do you think we should make a Catalog an optional property of a 
Context?  A lot of use cases would like to have a default spot to go 
find one, and you can always have private conventions about what other 
attribute keys might also point at other Catalogs.

>
> But, I would argue that these benefits are still secondary to the core 
> need to cleanly decouple sender from the receiver.
>
> -Ted.
>
>
>
Craig



Mime
View raw message