Interesting. A complete different approach but also very well organized. MVC can really be implemented in different ways in terms of organization.
Harbs <[email protected]> escreveu no dia quinta, 22/10/2020 à(s) 16:30: > I use PureMVC. > > I don’t use modules, and I’m personally skeptical that they really offer > very much for a JS web app. Modules have to add to the total weight of the > app and since binaries are not embedded into JS web apps, the extra weight > opf including everything in one compiled JS file is probably less than the > weight of using modules. > > Anyway, my structure looks like this: > > controller > model > - contants > - events > - helpers > - notifications > - proxies > - services > - vos > utils > view > - components > - constants > - events > - localization > - managers > - mediators > - renderers > > > On Oct 22, 2020, at 5:59 PM, Hugo Ferreira <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Thank you guys for your feedback. > > I have now a strategy. > > > > The difference between Approach B and Chris, it's about models. > > I prefer your and Chris approach. > > > > About split in to modules, yes I know that it's not fully operational. > > Sincerilly, not something that I'm worry right now but I want to make > this > > MVC pattern (even without split in to modules). > > > > Carlos Rovira <[email protected]> escreveu no dia quinta, > 22/10/2020 > > à(s) 15:35: > > > >> Hi Hugo, Chris, > >> > >> I use the same layout as Chris or you Hug's B option (I think both are > the > >> same if I'm interpreting right). > >> Just notice that the Modules are not working fully right now as we > noticed > >> few weeks ago. I think debug is working but not released (maybe Greg can > >> say if that's true or not). > >> > >> I think that's something that needs the expertise of Greg and Josh to > make > >> it fully work. Hope they can finally work at some point. > >> > >> El jue., 22 oct. 2020 a las 10:57, Hugo Ferreira (< > [email protected] > >>> ) > >> escribió: > >> > >>> Hi Christofer, > >>> > >>> Thank you. > >>> > >>> Interesting. > >>> Seems to follow better MVC pattern for a large application. > >>> I like it. > >>> > >>> Christofer Dutz <[email protected]> escreveu no dia quinta, > >>> 22/10/2020 à(s) 09:53: > >>> > >>>> Hi Hugo, > >>>> > >>>> in my Home Automation demo, I split up all Modules into separate maven > >>>> modules. > >>>> So right now I have sort of this structure > >>>> > >>>> MainModule > >>>> - model > >>>> - view > >>>> - controller > >>>> > >>>> ModuleA > >>>> - model > >>>> - view > >>>> - controller > >>>> > >>>> ModuleB > >>>> - model > >>>> - view > >>>> - controller > >>>> > >>>> The MainModule model contains all the types needed by the MainModule > >> and > >>>> which are shared among all modules and it takes care of loading > ModuleA > >>> and > >>>> ModuleB > >>>> ModuleA and ModuleB each have the model classes they need exclusively > >>>> inside > >>>> > >>>> Not sure if this is the Royale way, but it's sort of what replicates > >> the > >>>> structure I have in my backend. > >>>> > >>>> Chris > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Am 22.10.20, 10:47 schrieb "Hugo Ferreira" <[email protected]>: > >>>> > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> Looking for TodoMVC example, it's perfect. > >>>> It follows the MVC pattern at the point but we are talking about a > >>>> small > >>>> application with less then 10 files. > >>>> > >>>> On my current Flex application I'm using a different organization > >>> from > >>>> the > >>>> standard MVC: > >>>> + models > >>>> -- all model files > >>>> > >>>> + module_name_1 > >>>> -- MainViewName1.mxml > >>>> -- MainManagerName1.as > >>>> -- + some other sub-module_name_1 > >>>> ---- ViewName2.mxml > >>>> ---- ManagerName2.as > >>>> > >>>> + module_name_2 > >>>> -- MainViewName3.mxml > >>>> -- ManagerName3.as > >>>> > >>>> Somehow, it's MVC and all operations are in correspondente manager > >>>> (controller) as file. > >>>> > >>>> Looking now I'm not very satisfied with the solution. It's working > >>> and > >>>> I > >>>> will not change, it is what it is, however on my ongoing Royale > >>>> version I > >>>> can do a complete different approach. > >>>> There are hundread of mxml and as files, so the organization about > >>>> models > >>>> (all as model files) + views (all mxml files) + controllers (all as > >>>> controller files) with end up with a non standard MVC organization > >>>> structure. > >>>> > >>>> I'm thinking in one of two new approach: > >>>> Approach A: > >>>> + models > >>>> + views > >>>> --+ module_1 > >>>> ---- mxml1 > >>>> ---- mxml2 > >>>> + controllers > >>>> --+module_1 > >>>> ---- as1 > >>>> ---- as2 > >>>> > >>>> Approach B: > >>>> + models > >>>> --+ module_1 > >>>> ----+views > >>>> ----+controllers > >>>> --+ module_2 > >>>> ----+views > >>>> ----+controllers > >>>> > >>>> What do you guys think ? > >>>> Do you do MVC structure as the TodoMVC example or use a different > >>>> approach > >>>> as I do. > >>>> Do you think Approach A it's better than B or do you have a third > >>>> option ? > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Carlos Rovira > >> Apache Member & Apache Royale PMC > >> *Apache Software Foundation* > >> http://about.me/carlosrovira > >> > >
