ibatis-user-java mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Vic Cekvenich <...@friendvu.com>
Subject Re: was Re: Information about changelog - collections vs beans
Date Thu, 16 Dec 2004 20:13:04 GMT
I don't see it.

Even w/ Struts at Ziff Davis I allways had my return type set to HashMap 
in iBatis, so I NEVER  have to do mapping of fields in xml .
What I do now in version 2 is returh a HashMap; an ArrayList of HashMaps 
realy. (how ActionScript in Flex worked, they call it associative array 
to bind to a datagrid)

I send iBatis Collections via Hessian (SoA) to Swing Table Model (JDNC) 
and bind it. I deploy via WebStart. Works great.
Also I can map to a Swing Form Model (jGoodies Form Layout). On a submit 
action I do commons validator in Swing like I would in Struts. So a user 
enters a valid date or whatever. (way ot: I even do dynamic "tiles" in 
Swing w/ add/remove in JPanels).
Swing actions send in arguments back bia Hessian to Ibatis, also a Map. 
(The dispacher is commons-chain, and Context is a Map).
No where do I have getters/setters or field mapping.
Map is a Map of Objects so I know the class/instance Of the Object.
I can add fields in select statment in ibatis and it just shows up in my 
Swing table w/o any code changes. Losley coupled. Zero mapping of fields 
in XML or in Java.
Also, if I careate a computed or a fake field, I just put that property 
in the Map.
Collections good.

(and I have 100 page or so of docs/tutorial on sandraSF.com, if someone 
wants to know more about the "wrong" way. So I  locked iBatis to Hessian 
for nice remote service. Also I locked iBatis to JMX so I can flush the 
cache via JMX. And like I said, everything "server side" is Chain, so it 
was easy to implement a remote Lucene DAO. I was planing to donate parts 
to iBatis like JMX and CRUD dispatcher. Not a single bean, get set. Just 
select * and jTable Model that is based on a collection).

In any case, I do not see a problem, but would like to learn what others 
see as a potential problem that I do not see, since I am about to go live...
So if somone has the time or the will to educate me, I am all ears.


Clinton Begin wrote:

>I'll back up Kris on that one.  In my experience, the result of Map
>based domain models isn't pretty.
>It depends on what you're doing.  I'm sure there are places where it
>works well, but it's certainly the exception, not the rule.
>On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:46:05 +0000, Kris Jenkins
><krisajenkins@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>This is just one reason why I always recommend using JavaBeans for 99%
>>>>of your work.  Maps are inconsistent, unpredictable, not typesafe and
>>>I acctualy feel the other way, that 99% of time, Collections
>>>implementations such as Map and List are good.
>>>This way you can be loosley coupled.
>>>I used to like Beans, but have moved to collections, (  I learned from
>>>MM Flex.)
>>:-/ That doesn't sound like loose coupling to me - that sounds like
>>throwing away type safety.  By that logic, Perl would be inherently
>>loosely coupled, which it isn't.
>>Kris Jenkins
>>Email:  kris@jenkster.com
>>Blog:   http://cafe.jenkster.com/
>>Wiki:   http://wiki.jenkster.com/

RiA-SoA w/JDNC <http://www.SandraSF.com> forums
blog <http://www.sandrasf.com/adminBlog>

View raw message