You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to issues@struts.apache.org by "Richard Wallace (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2008/08/16 08:02:25 UTC

[jira] Created: (WW-2770) @Result type should be a class

@Result type should be a class
------------------------------

                 Key: WW-2770
                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2770
             Project: Struts 2
          Issue Type: Improvement
          Components: Plugin - Convention
            Reporter: Richard Wallace
            Priority: Critical


It feels like a huge step backwards from the Codebehind plugin to use a string as the type parameter to the @Result annotation. I much prefer the type safety and IDE support provided by using the actual result class.  The same can be said of the interceptor annotations.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Updated: (WW-2770) @Result type should be a class

Posted by "Musachy Barroso (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
     [ https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2770?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Musachy Barroso updated WW-2770:
--------------------------------

    Affects Version/s: 2.1.6

> @Result type should be a class
> ------------------------------
>
>                 Key: WW-2770
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2770
>             Project: Struts 2
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Plugin - Convention
>    Affects Versions: 2.1.6
>            Reporter: Richard Wallace
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: Future
>
>
> It feels like a huge step backwards from the Codebehind plugin to use a string as the type parameter to the @Result annotation. I much prefer the type safety and IDE support provided by using the actual result class.  The same can be said of the interceptor annotations.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Closed: (WW-2770) @Result type should be a class

Posted by "Wes Wannemacher (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
     [ https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2770?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Wes Wannemacher closed WW-2770.
-------------------------------

    Resolution: Won't Fix

As Musachy said, this was a request to allow Strings. Although the type-safety thing would be nice, it would also mean extra imports and knowledge about the actual class implementing a result type. If you want to create a patch that we can apply to conventions that supports both, reopen the issue and attach a patch, otherwise you won't see any traction on this.

> @Result type should be a class
> ------------------------------
>
>                 Key: WW-2770
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2770
>             Project: Struts 2
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Plugin - Convention
>    Affects Versions: 2.1.6
>            Reporter: Richard Wallace
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: Future
>
>
> It feels like a huge step backwards from the Codebehind plugin to use a string as the type parameter to the @Result annotation. I much prefer the type safety and IDE support provided by using the actual result class.  The same can be said of the interceptor annotations.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Updated: (WW-2770) @Result type should be a class

Posted by "James Holmes (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
     [ https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2770?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

James Holmes updated WW-2770:
-----------------------------

    Fix Version/s: Future

> @Result type should be a class
> ------------------------------
>
>                 Key: WW-2770
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2770
>             Project: Struts 2
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Plugin - Convention
>            Reporter: Richard Wallace
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: Future
>
>
> It feels like a huge step backwards from the Codebehind plugin to use a string as the type parameter to the @Result annotation. I much prefer the type safety and IDE support provided by using the actual result class.  The same can be said of the interceptor annotations.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Commented: (WW-2770) @Result type should be a class

Posted by "Dave Newton (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
    [ https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2770?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=44576#action_44576 ] 

Dave Newton commented on WW-2770:
---------------------------------

This can't possibly be a "critical" issue; "critical" should be reserved for things that actually affect normal operation rather than personal preference.

Using a name rather than a class allows for trivial implementation changes, just like the naming of spring beans. Feel free to append a patch, however; it will be reviewed and discussed.

> @Result type should be a class
> ------------------------------
>
>                 Key: WW-2770
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2770
>             Project: Struts 2
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Plugin - Convention
>            Reporter: Richard Wallace
>            Priority: Critical
>
> It feels like a huge step backwards from the Codebehind plugin to use a string as the type parameter to the @Result annotation. I much prefer the type safety and IDE support provided by using the actual result class.  The same can be said of the interceptor annotations.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Commented: (WW-2770) @Result type should be a class

Posted by "Musachy Barroso (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
    [ https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2770?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=45589#action_45589 ] 

Musachy Barroso commented on WW-2770:
-------------------------------------

It was a long standing request from people to make the type a string. You could start a thread in @dev and we can discuss it. I do like the string type better.

> @Result type should be a class
> ------------------------------
>
>                 Key: WW-2770
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2770
>             Project: Struts 2
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Plugin - Convention
>            Reporter: Richard Wallace
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: Future
>
>
> It feels like a huge step backwards from the Codebehind plugin to use a string as the type parameter to the @Result annotation. I much prefer the type safety and IDE support provided by using the actual result class.  The same can be said of the interceptor annotations.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Issue Comment Edited: (WW-2770) @Result type should be a class

Posted by "Dave Newton (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
    [ https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2770?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=44576#action_44576 ] 

newton_dave edited comment on WW-2770 at 8/19/08 9:07 AM:
----------------------------------------------------------

This cannot possibly be a "critical" issue; "critical" should be reserved for things that actually affect normal operation rather than personal preference.

Using a name rather than a class allows for trivial implementation changes, just like the naming of spring beans. Feel free to append a patch, however; it will be reviewed and discussed.

      was (Author: newton_dave):
    This can't possibly be a "critical" issue; "critical" should be reserved for things that actually affect normal operation rather than personal preference.

Using a name rather than a class allows for trivial implementation changes, just like the naming of spring beans. Feel free to append a patch, however; it will be reviewed and discussed.
  
> @Result type should be a class
> ------------------------------
>
>                 Key: WW-2770
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2770
>             Project: Struts 2
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Plugin - Convention
>            Reporter: Richard Wallace
>            Priority: Critical
>
> It feels like a huge step backwards from the Codebehind plugin to use a string as the type parameter to the @Result annotation. I much prefer the type safety and IDE support provided by using the actual result class.  The same can be said of the interceptor annotations.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Updated: (WW-2770) @Result type should be a class

Posted by "Richard Wallace (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
     [ https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2770?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Richard Wallace updated WW-2770:
--------------------------------

    Priority: Minor  (was: Critical)

Sorry, I must have accidentally set it to critical.  I'll have a go at implementing this.  Actually, if it were an Object then devs could use either a String or a Class and it would be more compatible with the Codebehind plugin.  WDYT?

> @Result type should be a class
> ------------------------------
>
>                 Key: WW-2770
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2770
>             Project: Struts 2
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Plugin - Convention
>            Reporter: Richard Wallace
>            Priority: Minor
>
> It feels like a huge step backwards from the Codebehind plugin to use a string as the type parameter to the @Result annotation. I much prefer the type safety and IDE support provided by using the actual result class.  The same can be said of the interceptor annotations.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.