struts-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Benedict <pbened...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Annotation Support for bypassing prepare
Date Wed, 07 Aug 2013 21:37:54 GMT
I wonder if perhaps there should be a Preparable2 interface that passes in
the name of the method that will execute. That might be more advanced than
the annotation. OTOH, @SkipPreparable could take an array of method names.

Which is more functional?


On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 3:10 PM, Sreekanth S. Nair <
sreekanth.nair@egovernments.org> wrote:

> Attaching SkippablePrepareInterceptor and SkipPrepare Annotation Code, I
> hope it may helpful for other who have similar requirement. Struts2 can
> include it, if strust2 developer think its worthy.
>
>
> --
> Thanks & Regards
> Srikanth
>
> On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 12:00 AM, Sreekanth S. Nair <
> sreekanth.nair@egovernments.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi Chris, i already answered for the same, we have more than 50 modules
>> and 1000 of Action classes. Doing what you say is not an easy task for us
>> instead of adding a simple annotation on those method.
>>
>> --
>> Thanks & Regards
>> Srikanth
>> Software Developer
>> --------------------------------
>> eGovernments Foundations
>> www.egovernments.org
>> Mob : 9980078913
>> --------------------------------
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 11:55 PM, Chris Pratt <thechrispratt@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Why not just take your action and move the Preparable interface and
>>> prepare() function to a subclass with the methods that require it's
>>> support?  Seems a lot easier than creating more infrastructure.
>>>   (*Chris*)
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Sreekanth S. Nair <
>>> sreekanth.nair@egovernments.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Okay, i can create one for mine, leaving to struts2 framework developer
>>> > whether strust2 need an annotation like @SkipPrepare. Thanks for your
>>> > support Dave.
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Thanks & Regards
>>> > Srikanth
>>> > Software Developer
>>> > --------------------------------
>>> > eGovernments Foundations
>>> > www.egovernments.org
>>> > Mob : 9980078913
>>> > --------------------------------
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 11:42 PM, Dave Newton <davelnewton@gmail.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Technically it already *is* part of S2 in the MethodFilterInterceptor
>>> > > class.
>>> > >
>>> > > I'm not particularly excited about an annotation to skip
>>> Prepareable, but
>>> > > I'm not fundamentally opposed, either.
>>> > >
>>> > > Dave
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Sreekanth S. Nair <
>>> > > sreekanth.nair@egovernments.org> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > The idea is precisely good, thats what i wanted but do you think
it
>>> > will
>>> > > be
>>> > > > a good addition to strust2 framework by any chance then i hope
the
>>> same
>>> > > > could be a part of struts2 framework itself.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > --
>>> > > > Thanks & Regards
>>> > > > Srikanth
>>> > > > Software Developer
>>> > > > --------------------------------
>>> > > > eGovernments Foundations
>>> > > > www.egovernments.org
>>> > > > Mob : 9980078913
>>> > > > --------------------------------
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 7:01 PM, Dave Newton <
>>> davelnewton@gmail.com>
>>> > > > wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > If you'll note in the docs the interceptor extends
>>> > > > MethodFilterInterceptor,
>>> > > > > so one trivial way to fix it is to configure the interceptor
for
>>> the
>>> > > > > specific actions.
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > Another option is to take the existing interceptor and extend
it
>>> to
>>> > > > support
>>> > > > > something like annotations, a naming convention, etc. to
skip
>>> either
>>> > > > > specific or general methods.
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > E.g., if your validation call was always named the same thing,
>>> you
>>> > > could
>>> > > > > either configure the interceptor package-wide, or change
the
>>> prepare
>>> > > > > interceptor to always skip preparation for methods annotated
with
>>> > > > > @DoNotPrepare, etc.
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > Dave
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Sreekanth S. Nair <
>>> > > > > sreekanth.nair@egovernments.org> wrote:
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > > Too many methods :( needs its own prepare then.
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > --
>>> > > > > > Thanks & Regards
>>> > > > > > Srikanth
>>> > > > > > Software Developer
>>> > > > > > --------------------------------
>>> > > > > > eGovernments Foundations
>>> > > > > > www.egovernments.org
>>> > > > > > Mob : 9980078913
>>> > > > > > --------------------------------
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 6:37 PM, Dave Newton <
>>> > davelnewton@gmail.com>
>>> > > > > > wrote:
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > Did you try `prepareWhateverMethodThatNeedsPrepare`?
I don't
>>> > recall
>>> > > > if
>>> > > > > > that
>>> > > > > > > works or not.
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 7:24 AM, Sreekanth S. Nair
<
>>> > > > > > > sreekanth.nair@egovernments.org> wrote:
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > No i can't do that, because that Action contains
other
>>> method
>>> > > which
>>> > > > > > needs
>>> > > > > > > > Prepare, the only option i can think of is
moving these
>>> Ajax
>>> > > method
>>> > > > > to
>>> > > > > > > some
>>> > > > > > > > other Action which is not extending Prepareable.
But as of
>>> now
>>> > > its
>>> > > > > very
>>> > > > > > > > hard because so many resources i have to change.
Any other
>>> > idea?
>>> > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > --
>>> > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards
>>> > > > > > > > Srikanth
>>> > > > > > > > Software Developer
>>> > > > > > > > --------------------------------
>>> > > > > > > > eGovernments Foundations
>>> > > > > > > > www.egovernments.org
>>> > > > > > > > Mob : 9980078913
>>> > > > > > > > --------------------------------
>>> > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 4:44 PM, Paul Benedict
<
>>> > > > pbenedict@apache.org
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > wrote:
>>> > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > Have you thought of removing the "implements
Preparable"
>>> from
>>> > > > your
>>> > > > > > > > action?
>>> > > > > > > > > That will do it.
>>> > > > > > > > > On Jul 26, 2013 6:12 AM, "Sreekanth S.
Nair" <
>>> > > > > > > > > sreekanth.nair@egovernments.org> wrote:
>>> > > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > Suppose i need to call any ajax
validation on the same
>>> > > Action,
>>> > > > it
>>> > > > > > > > > > unnecessarily run in to prepare.
Where that ajax
>>> validation
>>> > > > > doesn't
>>> > > > > > > > > > required to call prepare.
>>> > > > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > --
>>> > > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards
>>> > > > > > > > > > Srikanth
>>> > > > > > > > > > Software Developer
>>> > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------
>>> > > > > > > > > > eGovernments Foundations
>>> > > > > > > > > > www.egovernments.org
>>> > > > > > > > > > Mob : 9980078913
>>> > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------
>>> > > > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 4:40 PM,
Paul Benedict <
>>> > > > > > pbenedict@apache.org
>>> > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
>>> > > > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > Why would you want to bypass
it?
>>> > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 26, 2013 3:47 AM, "Sreekanth
S. Nair" <
>>> > > > > > > > > > > sreekanth.nair@egovernments.org>
wrote:
>>> > > > > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > Is there any annotation
available to bypass prepare
>>> > > method
>>> > > > > > while
>>> > > > > > > > > > invoking
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > certain methods, just
like @skipvalidation
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > --
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards
>>> > > > > > > > > > > > Srikanth
>>> > > > > > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > --
>>> > > > > > > e: davelnewton@gmail.com
>>> > > > > > > m: 908-380-8699
>>> > > > > > > s: davelnewton_skype
>>> > > > > > > t: @dave_newton <https://twitter.com/dave_newton>
>>> > > > > > > b: Bucky Bits <http://buckybits.blogspot.com/>
>>> > > > > > > g: davelnewton <https://github.com/davelnewton>
>>> > > > > > > so: Dave Newton <
>>> > http://stackoverflow.com/users/438992/dave-newton
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > --
>>> > > > > e: davelnewton@gmail.com
>>> > > > > m: 908-380-8699
>>> > > > > s: davelnewton_skype
>>> > > > > t: @dave_newton <https://twitter.com/dave_newton>
>>> > > > > b: Bucky Bits <http://buckybits.blogspot.com/>
>>> > > > > g: davelnewton <https://github.com/davelnewton>
>>> > > > > so: Dave Newton <
>>> http://stackoverflow.com/users/438992/dave-newton>
>>> > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > --
>>> > > e: davelnewton@gmail.com
>>> > > m: 908-380-8699
>>> > > s: davelnewton_skype
>>> > > t: @dave_newton <https://twitter.com/dave_newton>
>>> > > b: Bucky Bits <http://buckybits.blogspot.com/>
>>> > > g: davelnewton <https://github.com/davelnewton>
>>> > > so: Dave Newton <http://stackoverflow.com/users/438992/dave-newton>
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org
>



-- 
Cheers,
Paul

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message