[forge-dev] Getting lost in UICommands class hierarchy
antonio.mailing at gmail.com
Mon Oct 27 08:41:05 EDT 2014
The extra layer of AbstractValidationCommand, AbstractCDICommand,
AbstractJPACommand (notice that this layer already exists for JSF) is
justified by overriding isProjectRequired and getPrerequisiteCommands (all
the Java EE commands need a project and need to be setup, see the code
Then, if you say that the interface is optional, I would get rid of it.
All in all, I think that homogenize the code is very important for new
comers (like me). Creating a new command is, mostly, copy/paste + adding
some specific logic. And depending which class you copy/paste, you end up
with very different code.
*protected boolean *isProjectRequired()
public NavigationResult getPrerequisiteCommands(UIContext context)
NavigationResultBuilder builder = NavigationResultBuilder.create();
Project project = getSelectedProject(context);
if (project != null)
2014-10-27 13:35 GMT+01:00 George Gastaldi <ggastald at redhat.com>:
> Hi Antonio,
> Yeah, I think that's fine. The idea of having an interface is to reference
> the next command in the next() method (or as a prerequisite), but that is
> I think that would be a good idea, if these specializations had enough
> code to justify their existence.
> On 10/27/2014 02:58 AM, Antonio Goncalves wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm trying to add more commands in Forge... but I have to say, I'm a bit
> lost. So, I've made a quick UML class diagram.
> As you can see in the attached diagram (UIForge.png), most of the Java
> EE commands extend AbstractJavaEECommand, which makes sense. But not all of
> them (NewBeanCommand (CDI), ValidationNewAnnotationCommandImpl,
> NewQualifierCommand....). And some times you have an extra level of
> abstraction (AbstractFacesCommand). Same for the Java commands.
> JavaClassCommandImpl extend AbstractJavaSourceCommand but
> JavaAddAnnotationCommand and JavaFieldCommand inherit from
> Then, when you dive into a command (UIForgeStructure.pgn), some commands
> use interface and implementation (see in the second
> diagram JavaAddAnnotationCommandImpl
> implementing JavaAddAnnotationCommand), some don't
> (e.g. NewQualifierCommand). Is there a reason ?
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but the way I see it would be (HowIseeIt.png) :
> under AbstractJavaEECommand you have a set
> of AbstractValidationCommand, AbstractCDICommand, AbstractJPACommand....
> each implementing PrerequisiteCommandsProvider (this way, each command sets
> up its own pre-requisite). And then, under AbstractCDICommand you have all
> the NewQualifierCommand, NewBeanCommand....
> What do you think ? Am I the only one getting a little bit lost ;o)
> What do you think of re-structuring the class hierarchy ?
> Antonio Goncalves
> Software architect and Java Champion
> Web site <http://www.antoniogoncalves.org/> | Twitter
> <http://twitter.com/agoncal> | LinkedIn
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/agoncal> | Paris JUG
> <http://www.parisjug.org/> | Devoxx France <http://www.devoxx.fr/>
> forge-dev mailing listforge-dev at lists.jboss.orghttps://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
> forge-dev mailing list
> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
Software architect and Java Champion
Web site <http://www.antoniogoncalves.org/> | Twitter
<http://twitter.com/agoncal> | LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/agoncal>
| Paris JUG <http://www.parisjug.org/> | Devoxx France
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the forge-dev