I have this problem:
I need to create a BaseAction for a java web application (with Struts 1).
All the actions will extend this BaseAction and all the actions have more methods (create, update, delete, list, etc). There's no "execute" method.
I need this in order to get the ApplicationContext for spring but also for authentication or other things that all actions should do.
When there's only "execute" method the things are easy...just create the BaseAction with "execute" method and an abstract "performTask" method. The "forward" will be the result of the "performTask" method that all other actions will implement.
So I can't do the same design for actions that have more than one method and every method has its own forward.
Thanx,
Adri108
In Struts 1, struts-config.xml is a driving file. This file redirects various actions to respective ActionForward method.
Related
I know how mythz generally feels about HATEOAS, but let's say that I have to follow the HATEOAS principles in my REST services and add links ("self", "parent", and other possible relations) to my DTOs.
Links like "self" and "parent" contains paths to the resources and those paths are of course related to my routes.
I'm using the following project/deployment structure for my ServiceStack REST service. If that matters, I'm using ServiceStack 3.9.71.
Service Gateway Assembly:
defines my DTOs. Each DTO has a factory creating that DTO from the corresponding domain object
defines operations and their routes
Service Implementation Assembly:
uses ServiceGateway to get DTO definitions and access their factories
does whatever domain logic requires and create the corresponding DTOs through the afore mentioned factories
Service Interface Assembly:
define my REST services and
calls ServiceImplementation from ServiceStack's HttpHandler, according to REST verbs (GET, POST, ...)
WHERE would be the proper place to add link information to my DTOs?
Option1:
In my Service Gateway, when I build the DTOs themselves. It seems logical:
I know what I need to know about my domain objects and I can easily
build the links. Except that my DTOs are now all including an
additional member (Links) and building those links forces me to
explicitly provide paths/routes (i.e. hard code them). Seems to lead
to a maintenance nightmare.
Option2:
In my Service Interface assembly, where I have the request context and
I know my routes. I can encapsulate whatever my Service Implementation
returns in a meta-object containing the response and a link
collection. However, to build that link collection, I sometimes need
information available at the domain (i.e. Service Implementation)
level. The big "con" side for me is that it creates a new additional
and artificial level in all my responses. Could be seen as a way to
standardize response formats but I don't like it.
Option3:
My hope is that I can write a wrapper generically "injecting" a "Links" member to all the DTOs
I return by hooking somewhere into ServiceStack in my Service Interface assembly. I haven't
investigated much in that direction because I feel I could be wrong on
the whole approach here.
Any advise / suggestion welcome. Thanks to all.
I'm not sure If I'm suggesting you option1 or option3, but this Is what I came out after trying to do the same thing.
I started from this answer.
Now you can access route metadata directly from filters.
So my current approach is:
=> Services create the dto responses and the next collection of hypermedia links that will be attached to the response. In this level you know the "operations" by type but not "how" you will build the routes. I think it is coherent that domain level deals with workflows of operations.
=> Within a response filter I get the available routes from Metadata, and build the routes from dto properties by convention. Finally routes are added to http header.
Caveats:
I'm mapping 1 dto - 1 route. This approach could be more difficult in other cases.
I'm developing a web application that doesn't need database. All data comes via REST.
My question is: Is possible to use a model class (extended from AppModel) to manage data from a RESTfull service?, How to do that?, Does CakePHP any way to mapping directly a RESTfull web service?.
I have researched and I have found the $useTable attribute (http://book.cakephp.org/2.0/en/models/model-attributes.html#usetable) but I'm not sure if exists another way to do this in a better way.
My first idea is implement my own functions in a Model and put $useTable to false.
Thank you.
There is no such functionality that ships with CakePHP, but it's relatively easy to implement it on your own.
Check out datasources, they sit between the model and the data, but can also be used standalone, ie you can use datasource instances directly, or indirectly through the model layer (find/save/delete calls are using the datasource CRUD methods).
Checkout https://github.com/nodesagency/CakePHP-Rest-Datasource for some inspiration.
After some API implementations, using jsonrpclib in Python, I need to migrate them inside a Django Framework project. I am quite new in Django and Piston/tastypie, but have some experience using jsonrpc/xmlrpc libs in my Python apps.
Until now I have developed some modules, with a ServiceClass attached to the register of jsonrpc server who handle the request and call the methods in the ServiceClass.
When the class is attached to the register, a new instance of the ServiceClass is created, loading all the initial data and keeping it in memory, so every method called through jsonrpc can have access to the internal values in that instance.
Now, I am trying to do the same in Django with Piston or Tastypie. I followed this link http://www.robertshady.com/content/creating-very-basic-api-using-python-django-and-piston and other resources, and all the documentation I read is clear, showing the correct way to work with it:
Modify url.py to map requests like "/api/" to a specific handler.
Add a handler.py in the api application, extending the BaseHandler of
Piston/Tastypie.
So I am wondering if its the correct way of working with Django and APIs, to create the instance of my ServiceClass (init the data, provide the methods) inside handler.py when I create the instance of the Handler extending the BaseHandler. Is this Handler class instantiated once when the server starts? What if my ServiceClass relies on some Model to load the data from it?
I want to avoid the framework to instantiate my class everytime a new request arrive to the /api/ application.
I will be glad to hear about any recommendation,
Thanks,
Specifically for piston... You shouldnt really use the handler in terms of an instance. Its more like a metaclass that you set up with class attributes. These attributes control whicch model the handler will be bound to if any. And what fields it should show or what methods it supports.
Generally the request enter one of your methods and you then handle the request however you want, as an isolated state. If it needs to use a shared resource or use the model for queries, that part is up to you, being shared from some imported resource . You said you need a model which is why you would bind it to the handler as a class attribute and then query on it. You shouldnt really store state on the handler.
I'm in a process of migrating Rails project into Django. Rails project was built using restful routes and it never touches the database. Instead, it simply redirects to different methods which all call an external service with the specified action method. Now, I have found a number of frameworks for django that provide restful capability plus a bunch of bells and whistles, but it's an overkill for my current case.
As an alternative, I can ignore action method in urls.py by simply providing a regex to validate urls and then parse the request method in views.py, redirecting to the appropriate method. Is this a way to go or are there any other approaches that I can look at?
Class based views look like the idiomatic way to organize restful view functions by request method.
Django snippets has several simple example implementations.
I am currently trying to unit test my Service layer (all *Impl.java classes) in a GWT app. Well the problem is that in the code, I have a dependency which targets an object provided by the Httpsession. Actually, I'm storing a User object (the currently logged in user) in the httpSession.
In order to get it back from the HttpSession (in the *Impl.java class), I am using this :
User user = ServiceUtil.getUser(getThreadLocalRequest().getSession());
How can I mock this object from my Unit test code ?
thanks a lot,
In the JUnit test case you can write
HttpSession session = new MockHttpSession();
Where MockHttpSession is this
You can put your user object in this session and then execute your test case.
I recommend you change the structure of your application so that the service layer doesn't depend on such things as a session (context agnostic) but instead the methods which need a user object of some kind get it injected (via parameter or however). So actually you include a very thin presentation layer (or however you may call it) which handles things such as responding to HTTP requests, logging a user in and putting the user object in the session and just calls service layer methods.
That way you can mock your user object in the unit test, pass it to your service layer and don't need any mock framework.