The final class that gets listened to needs to have its property be bindable. The interface being bindable gets you past the compiler, but the warning is a run-time when it actually looks at the instance it is hooking up to.
From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sefi Ninio Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 10:15 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Binding using Interface Hi Josh, Thanks for the reply, but this didn't work. The interface extends IEventDispatcher as you suggested. That required all implementing classes it also extend EventDispatcher because of unimplemented interface functions. And, even after all that, the warning remains! On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 9:58 AM, Josh McDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: public interface IMyBindable extends IEventDispatcher {} On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 4:51 PM, sefi.ninio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi everyone... I get a binding warning I just can't seem to shake off... I have an interface (let's call it IMyInterface) and it is defining, among other things, a setter/getter function pair. I know, I know - this screams extending a base class and not implementing an interface, but bear with me... The implementing classes implement those setter/getter pair, and the getter function has the [Bindable] metatag defined. Sure, Binding works like a charm, but that warning bugs me. I know extending a base class that implements those setter/getter as bindable will solve this. I'm just wandering if there's a way to work with an interface and still not get that warning... Thanks, Sefi ------------------------------------ -- Flexcoders Mailing List FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.comYahoo! Groups Links http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/ -- "Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls. It tolls for thee." :: Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald :: 0437 221 380 :: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
