ok, so a module's model should be as well in the module. since it is used to store things related to the module. You can see an App as many MVCs that are nested, one is the main app, then module, then sub views, then sub custom components and then a Royale ui control. a model in a control is just for that control in contrast to an app model that needs to be usable through all apps (that's why Crux Inject is so helpful there). So App and module models used to be used all way down its own hierarchy.
El jue., 22 oct. 2020 a las 16:59, Hugo Ferreira (<[email protected]>) escribió: > 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 > > > -- Carlos Rovira Apache Member & Apache Royale PMC *Apache Software Foundation* http://about.me/carlosrovira
