<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Spring Controllers with Prototype Scope</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.digizenstudio.com/blog/2006/10/09/spring-controllers-with-prototype-scope/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.digizenstudio.com/blog/2006/10/09/spring-controllers-with-prototype-scope/</link>
	<description>Jing Xue's Weblog</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 02:58:37 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jing Xue</title>
		<link>http://www.digizenstudio.com/blog/2006/10/09/spring-controllers-with-prototype-scope/comment-page-1/#comment-16148</link>
		<dc:creator>Jing Xue</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Oct 2006 17:21:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.digizenstudio.com/blog/2006/10/09/spring-controllers-with-prototype-scope/#comment-16148</guid>
		<description>Hi Fokko,

Well, it's just one of the scenarios I picked as an example.  A SimpleFormController, together with its superclasses, provides numerous overriding points, some of which don't necessarily have the visibility to the form backing object.

That being said, sure, what you are suggesting can be another viable approach.  Although we can only do that when the form backing object is not an actual domain object which we wouldn't want to arbitrarily "stuff up" :).

Thanks!
--Jing</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Fokko,</p>
<p>Well, it&#8217;s just one of the scenarios I picked as an example.  A SimpleFormController, together with its superclasses, provides numerous overriding points, some of which don&#8217;t necessarily have the visibility to the form backing object.</p>
<p>That being said, sure, what you are suggesting can be another viable approach.  Although we can only do that when the form backing object is not an actual domain object which we wouldn&#8217;t want to arbitrarily &#8220;stuff up&#8221; :).</p>
<p>Thanks!<br />
&#8211;Jing</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: F. Degenaar</title>
		<link>http://www.digizenstudio.com/blog/2006/10/09/spring-controllers-with-prototype-scope/comment-page-1/#comment-16120</link>
		<dc:creator>F. Degenaar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Oct 2006 09:11:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.digizenstudio.com/blog/2006/10/09/spring-controllers-with-prototype-scope/#comment-16120</guid>
		<description>Why don't you put the object you've loaded from the DB into the form-backing object in the first place? There will be no name space clashing as Spring MVP handles storing the form-backing object into the request or session and retireving it from there.
Just my 0.02 EUR
Regards
Fokko</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why don&#8217;t you put the object you&#8217;ve loaded from the DB into the form-backing object in the first place? There will be no name space clashing as Spring MVP handles storing the form-backing object into the request or session and retireving it from there.<br />
Just my 0.02 EUR<br />
Regards<br />
Fokko</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
