Sean, Thanks for what I consider to be a pretty definitive statement.
The approach could be backend CFCs, including a fa�ade, that would serve the needs of the Flex app that could, at least in part, be leveraged by Mach-ii. That's the point of demarcation - which was exactly what I was looking for. Had I greater experience with Mach-ii, I might have been able to conclude that on my own. Thanks again. Jeff -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sean A Corfield Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 2:35 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [CFCDev] Mach-ii vs. Struts On Jun 11, 2004, at 9:29 AM, Battershall, Jeff wrote: > I've done very little Mach-ii development, but I believe somewhere in > their docs is the assertion that Mach-ii should be able to drive a > Flash application with equal aplomb to an HTML one. An assertion I strongly disagree with... Mach II's strength is in providing a controller in CF to manage a model (CFCs) and a bunch of CF views. When you have an RIA - be it hand-coded Flash or generated from Flex - the controller needs to move into the Flash tier and control the Flash views. The only CF part that remains is the model (CFCs) and perhaps a fa�ade (also a CFC). You really cannot mix Mach II effectively with Flash. Phil's example app works by providing a fa�ade over the model and has a Mach II / HTML front end (calling the fa�ade) and a Flash front end (also calling the fa�ade), i.e., Mach II is not used in the Flash version (at least, as I understand Phil's app). That is the same approach Macromedia's online store takes, except that we wrote the Flash app first and then built an HTML UI with Mach II, that completely reused the CFCs behind the Flash app. I think that Mach II for AS2 is a promising approach but there are some serious logistics to be figured out (how views are defined / handled; how the listener model really works; how remote and local 'notify' is handled etc). Flex is very interesting because it actually implements MVC directly and uses a declarative style to bind controls to data, supported by a clean event-based architecture. Yes, the back end code (e.g., Java, CF) still needs to be well-structured and many design patterns can help there but there are few (if any?) frameworks that are intended to apply to back end code that has no UI... Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' in the message of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by Mindtool, Corporation (www.mindtool.com). An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' in the message of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by Mindtool, Corporation (www.mindtool.com). An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
