no you need to dispatch the event yourself. as i said in some cases a get/set pair is needed, but not always. my strategy is to have multiple events that updates multple properties dependent on which group changed.
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 4:15 PM, reflexactions <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Yeah but if u dont have a get/set how do you know the property > changed and who will fires the event, or are you saying that Flex > automatically creates and dispatches the event for you? > > tks > --- In [email protected] <flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>, > "Johannes Nel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > >>I'm fairly certain you do need get/set functions to use custom > events. > > actually not. > > > > [Bindable("event")] > > public var lala:Type; > > > > and an ad hoc event being dispatched works well. if the property is > > being set on your model and you wish to dispatch a custom event, > > creating a setter is the way to do it, but managing invalidations > > based on logic and dispatching events can allow you to manage > > multiple properties in batch schemas. remember that you can also > have > > > > [Bindable("event2")] > > [Bindable("event1")] > > [Bindable("event")] > > public var lala:Type; > > > > as for generators, i used to use python, these days i use JET which > is > > native to eclipse. > > I would also recomend having a look at the eclipse modeling > framework, > > GEF, GMF and such things if you like code generation. > > > > On 9/3/08, Josh McDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I'm fairly certain you do need get/set functions to use custom > events. It > > > might be a pain, but unfortunately it's when you have objects > with many > > > bindable fields that you're more likely to need the custom events > (otherwise > > > binding becomes very cpu-intensive). > > > > > > -Josh > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 9:30 PM, Johannes Nel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > >> it does depend on the scale of your application. first off, to > use custom > > >> events you do not need getters and setters, but it does depend > on how you > > >> want to use it. my personal feeling around models are that they > should > > >> always be generated, its such a waste of time to code 'em by > hand. > > >> > > >> > > >> On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 1:28 PM, reflexactions > > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > >> > > >>> But then you have to write all the event creation and > dispatch, plus > > >>> all the getter/setter. > > >>> > > >>> That might be fair enough if you have a handful of props but if > this > > >>> is a couple of data classes with says 100 props each thats > quite a > > >>> bit of typing when all you want is a couple of props not to fire > > >>> events when they change... unless there is a tool to generate > the > > >>> code from a list of variables. > > >>> > > >>> Personally in some cases I use custom events and others I am ok > with > > >>> the default handling, depends on what I am doing as to which is > more > > >>> suited to the situation. > > >>> > > >>> --- In [email protected] > > >>> <flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com><flexcoders% > 40yahoogroups.com>, > > >>> "Johannes Nel" <johannes.nel@> > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> > > > >>> > using custom events with your bindable metadata is not only > best > > >>> practice > > >>> > but allows you to decide which properties you want to refresh. > > >>> > [Bindable("myEvent")] > > >>> > i would recomend using this at all times. > > >>> > > > >>> > On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 1:04 PM, Josh McDonald <dznuts@> wrote: > > >>> > > > >>> > > What it does is renames your variables, and creates get/set > > >>> methods, but > > >>> > > it doesn't wrap the whole class. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > So unfortunately it's either all-or-none with the class- > level > > >>> [Bindable] > > >>> > > > > >>> > > -Josh > > >>> > > > > >>> > > On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 9:01 PM, reflexactions > > >>> <reflexactions@>wrote: > > >>> > > >>> > > > > >>> > >> Ah ok.. > > >>> > >> I had thought the compiler generated a wrapper or sub class > > >>> behind > > >>> > >> the scenes when you used the bindable tag... > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> Well ok learn something new eahc day... > > >>> > >> tks > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> --- In > > >>> > >> [email protected]<flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com><flexcoders% > 40yahoogroups.com>, > > >>> "Josh McDonald" <dznuts@> > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> > Nope. [Bindable] on a class doesn't wrap the class, it's > just > > >>> > >> exactly the > > >>> > >> > same as putting [Bindable] on every public field. > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> > -Josh > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> > On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 8:45 PM, reflexactions > > >>> > >> <reflexactions@>wrote: > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > If I add the Bindable tag at a class level every > property is > > >>> > >> wrapped in > > >>> > >> > > by a sort of proxy that then raises PropertyChange > events as > > >>> > >> > > appropriate. > > >>> > >> > > > > >>> > >> > > This certainly saves a lot of time instead of having > to go > > >>> > >> through a > > >>> > >> > > class and add Bindable to every single property. > > >>> > >> > > > > >>> > >> > > But... > > >>> > >> > > What if there is one property that I dont want to be > > >>> Bindable and > > >>> > >> more > > >>> > >> > > importantly I dont want it to raise PropertyChange > events. > > >>> > >> > > > > >>> > >> > > Is there same NonBindable tag to achieve this??? > > >>> > >> > > > > >>> > >> > > tks > > >>> > >> > > > > >>> > >> > > > > >>> > >> > > ------------------------------------ > > >>> > >> > > > > >>> > >> > > -- > > >>> > >> > > 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 > > >>> > >> > > > > >>> > >> > > > > >>> > >> > > > > >>> > >> > > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> > -- > > >>> > >> > "Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls. It > tolls > > >>> for > > >>> > >> thee." > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> > :: Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald > > >>> > >> > :: 0437 221 380 :: josh@ > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> ------------------------------------ > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> -- > > >>> > >> 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 > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > -- > > >>> > > "Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls. It > tolls > > >>> for thee." > > >>> > > > > >>> > > :: Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald > > >>> > > :: 0437 221 380 :: josh@ > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > -- > > >>> > j:pn > > >>> > \\no comment > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> j:pn > > >> \\no comment > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > "Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls. It tolls > for thee." > > > > > > :: Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald > > > :: 0437 221 380 :: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > -- > > j:pn > > \\no comment > > > > > -- j:pn \\no comment
