struts-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mike Baroukh <>
Subject [struts2] ConfigurationBuilder
Date Thu, 02 Nov 2006 16:47:50 GMT


I don't know if this post is on the right place.
I wanted to speak about a method I use to build my struts2 (but I was 
doing the same with struts1 ...) configuration file.
This to :
- share my experience
- eventually have any comment that tell me why I'm totally wrong.
- eventually, have any return from struts2 developpers who think this 
way to do could be incorporated in struts2 ...

I build web application in a developper team.
Once, I said to me that struts1/2 configuration file is not enough 
modular and boring to do (especially with tiles !).
I also thought that there was not enough check or constraints :
- no check for class or view existence.
- no way to say that this 'pool' of actions MUST herite from this class 
or implements that interface

So I made my struts configbuilder.
Here is an example of what it does :
    <package name="packagename" >
        <action name="affichePrestation" class="MyActionAction">
            <result name="success">view.jsp</result>

wich reside in package "mymodule" is automatically included in the 
package "packagename" loaded before (so benefit of interceptors, 
extends, ...) and action is converted to
  <action name="affichePrestation" class="mymodule.MyActionAction">
       <result name="success">/WEB-INF/classes/mymodule/view.jsp</result>

As you can see :
- packages with the same name are "aggregated"
- class names are automatically expanded
- view names are automatically expanded too.

Also, I if use tiles, jsp name is automatically replaced with a 
generated tiles name that is automatically created and incorporated in 
the main tiles config file.

For views, you can see that I used to put jsps in the same package of 
actions. this way
- it's much, much  simplier.
- jsps are accessible via /WEB-INF/classes/<packagename>/
- action + config + jsp = a sort of component : I can, for example, 
refactor and change package name. My component will continue to work 
correctly without having to change anything.
I suppose that there must be a lot of people who will think that this 
way to do is "bad", but what I can say is that applications are much 
more easy to write and much more easy to maintain. I do that from about 
2 years now and I had no problem on any application server I use (resin, 
tomcat, weblogic, websphere, jboss ...).

In fact, it's  simple, but helps a lot when writing web applications.


View raw message