Hi Alex, Observe is designed to be used in MXML (it's even billed as the "world's smallest tag") and that's how I use it.
http://weblogs.macromedia.com/paulw/archives/2006/05/the_worlds_smal.html As it happens it doesn't implement IMXMLObject. In any case, since it uses regular binding expressions for the "source" property, I believe it has the limitation-by-design I referred to. On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 5:17 PM, Alex Harui <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Never used Observe, but if it implements IMXMLObject or you subclass > and do so, then you can use it in MXML > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On > Behalf Of *Richard Rodseth > *Sent:* Wednesday, August 13, 2008 4:16 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* [flexcoders] Observing collections > > > > For some reason I have an aversion to adding event listeners in > ActionScript, favouring binding expressions and the Observe tag from Adobe > Consulting. Not sure how rational this is, but there you have it. Binding is > just so damn elegant. > > However, collections are a problem. It seems that so often you want to > update something if either the collection itself or its contents changes, > and you don't really care about the details of the change. > > I suppose if you're a DataGrid watching its dataprovider you do care and > can minimize updates, but in many of the use cases I've encountered, that's > not the case - my observer is going to do something with the whole > collection (or maybe I've just been lazy about exploiting possible > optimizations). > > Is there anything like the Observe tag that can be instantiated in MXML and > can trigger a function call on a COLLECTION_CHANGE event? > > >
