I wrote a framework once for Flex, but I gave up as I started to re-question the problems I was trying to solve. As in the end it was a future idea of marrying both RIA + Server to compensate for Flex Builder 1.0 being the most evil IDE I've ever meet :) (hey even Macromedia staffers at the time agreed its evil and thus they moved to Eclipse I'm guessing).
That being said, I find value in Cairngorm but I don't think it's a good idea in the hands of most Flex folks. Allow me to explain before I get tarred & feathered. Cairngorm represents a template to help folks get started really, as in the end you're given an objective - "Go build xyz RIA and be snappy about it". Now the first thing that happens is a team is assembled, in some cases you are the team but no matter how you look at it, you need to then break yourself into 3 parts. Designer, Architect and Developer. Now the smart thing to do is to wire frame your approach, what am I going to do and how am I going to do it. So before you even look at the RIA composition, you need to spin up some prototypes (eg Say you wanted to want to write a control that works like Office Ribbon - well you need to prototype that a bit more before you agree upon it). Once you finish the prototypes, you need to wire these moving pieces together, and depending on time and budget, Cairngorm can give you a lot of cover fire fast, as well you have the following in your favour: - You have the abstraction thinking already in place, no need to worry about composition concerns and questions. - You are able to frame the SOS calls in a manner that makes sense to your peers. Name on person on FlexCoders that doesn't know what Cairngorm is or how it works and I'll show you a person whom is unlikely to help you anyway. - You can always re factor later. So Cairngrom has a way of helping you win the hill fast and without thinking (provided you trust Alistair and Steve's brain, which hey, they aren't dumb and I find value in their thinking). The danger though is you can end up hitting an egg with a ball pin hammer or break yourself into jail. As if you are building a shopping cart system? then it's not needed - i mean really, it's just not. If you are building an intranet, then it is but keep in mind you've only just scratched the surface of the problem you are trying to achieve. As whilst Cairngorm will give you the templates to build the foundation for each module up from, you still need to think more about timing and when to load assets externally etc. Not to mention deep linking and of course the added complexity of Runtime Shared Libraries and their pro's / con's of use. Point is, it has value but those whom declare they hate it are most likely the ones whom know how Flex works and are already thinking of the last paragraph and can see the devalue in the architecture and most likley have their own home grown solutions ready to save the day. That's all frameworks are really there fore, to provide a template approach to a basic methodology that can effectively get you started or shipping faster than you could on your own starting from absolute zero. I dislike Cairngorm simply because of the people that abuse it and lack of leadership from Adobe around shaping it in a way that helps them out of jail instead of encouraging them into breaking into jail. As for the idea and the composition of it, I dig it and would praise Steve and his team mates on doing something that probably saved Flex from certain death at the very early stages. Something now at Microsoft i wish they didn't hehehehhe... (to be fair, competition is healthy so wouldn't have it any other way) my 2c On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 11:24 PM, Mark Mandel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Possible over-dramatisation on my part, but seriously, I know a lot of > people who really, really, really dislike that framework. (Maybe enough > 'really') > > Mark > > On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 4:21 PM, Kai Koenig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Or to be more precise: I understand some concerns people >> have and I acknowledge that people might prefer different >> approaches when it comes to architecture, that's fine. >> >> But if someone states "hating" a framework, I wonder if >> that's a bit too much and if they are not looking at >> CG from an objective point of view. >> >> Cheers >> Kai >> >> >>Actually, talking to a lot of people at cf.Objective() and at webDU, >> >>most hate Cairngorm. In fact, besides Robin, I've not met a single >> >>person in the past 6 months that has not ripped Cairngorm to pieces >> >>whenever it has been mentioned. >> > >> >Eh, the other person besides Robin would be me. I still don't get >> >most of the issues people have with CG. :) >> > >> > >> >Cheers >> >Kai >> > >> > >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- > E: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > W: www.compoundtheory.com > > > -- Regards, Scott Barnes http://www.mossyblog.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cfaussie" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
