Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #26327
| Date | 2013-10-16 13:42 +0300 |
|---|---|
| From | Donkey Hottie <donkey@fredriksson.dy.fi> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: Java EE Architecture |
| References | <69e1528a-aa62-41ce-88e5-1540f437e89e@googlegroups.com> <qMCdnd-cQ4RiAcvPnZ2dnUVZ7tudnZ2d@bt.com> <l3ljnp$i9c$1@shakotay.alphanet.ch> |
| Message-ID | <0672ja-utj.ln1@tempest.fredriksson.dy.fi> (permalink) |
16.10.2013 11:45, 1connu kirjoitti:
> lipska the kat a écrit :
>> On 09/10/13 21:41, art.marole@gmail.com wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I would like to prepare typical Java EE solution (EJB, JSF, JPA) now,
>>> and I have quite stupid problem related with domain objects. I want
>>> to create Person class as persistence class, but I don't know in
>>> which module I shoud put this class: Business Layer (ejb module) or
>>> in Integration Layer (jar module).
>>>
>>> Person class is more related with logic, so I should put it in ejb
>>> module, but in this case I will need to create dependency relation
>>> from Integration Layer to Business Layer as Integration Layer need to
>>> know what object should store in DB (ex. void store(Person object){};).
>>> Put Person class in Integration Layer will remove this unwanted
>>> dependency, but I feel that Person class is more Business class then
>>> Integration class.
>>>
>>> What do you think about it?
>>
>>
>> A Person class ... A PERSON class., please, please, *please* don't
>> have a Person class
>>
>> For the sake of whatever omnipotent deity you pray to, do not have a
>> Person class
>>
>> *People* do not belong in a computer system.
>>
>> Why?
>>
>> Because it's a poor abstraction.
>>
>> How are you going to model consciousness, sentience, the 'mind', the
>> 'soul'? let alone arms legs, eyes and teeth :-)
>>
>> You *do not need* a Person class.
>>
>> Let's put it another way
>>
>> The very fact that you are having problems deciding where your Person
>> belongs should alert you to the fact that it is a poor abstraction.
>>
>> Try Account, or Record, or if you absolutely *must* User but not
>> Person, you will end up regretting it.
>>
>> lipska
>>
>>
> Why not ?
> You can have an abstract class Person with minimum field (name, date
> birth) and sub class depending of role of theses persons (ex User
> (login/password) ) in your model.
I see no problem with Person.
I have interface IPerson, and implementations Person and ExternalPerson.
I'm a lead programmer on an Identity Management solution.
--
Keep it short for pithy sake.
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Java EE Architecture art.marole@gmail.com - 2013-10-09 13:41 -0700
Re: Java EE Architecture Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-10-09 14:45 -0700
Re: Java EE Architecture Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-10-09 22:00 -0400
Re: Java EE Architecture Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-10-09 22:18 -0400
Re: Java EE Architecture art.marole@gmail.com - 2013-10-10 00:47 -0700
Re: Java EE Architecture Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-10-16 20:37 -0400
Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-10 13:26 +0100
Re: Java EE Architecture 1connu <1connu999@gmail.com> - 2013-10-16 10:45 +0200
Re: Java EE Architecture Donkey Hottie <donkey@fredriksson.dy.fi> - 2013-10-16 13:42 +0300
Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-16 11:55 +0100
Re: Java EE Architecture Donkey Hottie <donkey@fredriksson.dy.fi> - 2013-10-16 14:18 +0300
Re: Java EE Architecture Donkey Hottie <donkey@fredriksson.dy.fi> - 2013-10-16 14:25 +0300
Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-16 14:23 +0100
Re: Java EE Architecture Donkey Hottie <donkey@fredriksson.dy.fi> - 2013-10-16 17:10 +0300
Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-16 16:44 +0100
Re: Java EE Architecture "L." <carisio@gmail.com> - 2013-10-16 10:15 -0700
Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-16 19:01 +0100
Re: Java EE Architecture "L." <carisio@gmail.com> - 2013-10-16 12:17 -0700
Re: Java EE Architecture Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-10-16 21:01 +0000
Re: Java EE Architecture Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-10-16 20:40 -0400
Re: Java EE Architecture Donkey Hottie <donkey@fredriksson.dy.fi> - 2013-10-17 00:00 +0300
Re: Java EE Architecture Wayne <nospam@all.invalid> - 2013-10-16 23:08 -0400
Re: Java EE Architecture Donkey Hottie <donkey@fredriksson.dy.fi> - 2013-10-19 17:05 +0300
Re: Java EE Architecture Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-10-19 14:48 -0700
Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-20 09:00 +0100
Re: Java EE Architecture "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2013-10-20 19:40 +1100
Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-20 10:07 +0100
Re: Java EE Architecture Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-12-16 20:14 -0400
Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"lipskathekat at yahoo dot co dot uk"> - 2013-12-17 08:47 +0000
Re: Java EE Architecture Jeff Higgins <jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2013-10-16 20:19 -0400
Re: Java EE Architecture Jeff Higgins <jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2013-10-16 21:24 -0400
Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-16 11:49 +0100
Re: Java EE Architecture "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2013-10-16 22:24 +1100
Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-16 13:39 +0100
Re: Java EE Architecture Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-10-16 20:39 -0400
Re: Java EE Architecture "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 13:43 +1100
Re: Java EE Architecture Jeff Higgins <jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2013-10-16 23:22 -0400
Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-17 08:53 +0100
Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-17 08:57 +0100
Re: Java EE Architecture "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 19:31 +1100
Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-17 09:56 +0100
Re: Java EE Architecture "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 20:18 +1100
Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-17 10:56 +0100
Re: Java EE Architecture "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 21:39 +1100
Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-17 12:08 +0100
Class Person [was: Java EE Architecture] "Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> - 2013-10-18 08:19 +0100
Re: Java EE Architecture Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-10-17 21:00 -0400
Re: Java EE Architecture Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-10-17 21:02 -0400
Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-18 09:06 +0100
Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-18 09:04 +0100
Re: Java EE Architecture Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-10-19 22:43 -0400
Re: Java EE Architecture lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-10-20 09:05 +0100
Re: Java EE Architecture Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-10-20 09:24 -0400
Re: Java EE Architecture Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-10-16 20:43 -0400
csiph-web