I'll try and explain with pseudo code: //Creates an instance, and sets "a" to a reference to the new instance a = new FooMachine();
a.barProperty = 7; //Now "b" is a new *reference* to the same instance. Now we say a === b b = a; //outputs "7"; trace(b.barProperty); a.barProperty = 9; //outputs "9"; trace(b.barProperty); //Creates a *second* instance, and sets "a" to a reference to it. Doesn't affect "b" a = new FooMachine(); a.barProperty = 12; //outputs "9"; trace(b.barProperty); Binding simply does the same thing as setting "b = a" above. It doesn't make copies of the objects, just sets your local variable to be a reference to the same instance. -Josh On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 12:25 AM, Manu Dhanda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > But Josh, as I put in my previous posts, > I used a local arraycollection(instead of ListCollectionView) pointing to > Model, so that only my local will get changed when i 'll apply any filter > to > it. > > But, then, my local doesn't update with the changes in Model. This was my > problem originally. > My local got initiated with Model, but after tht any updates in Model > didn't > reflected in my local collection. > > I put a workaround for this problem in one of my posts above. > But, this [Bindable] and BindingUtils remained a puzzle for me. > > Thanks, > Manu. > > > > > Josh McDonald-4 wrote: > > > > Because if you have collection A, and components bind to it, all 3 > > components will see changes caused by the filter. But if you create a new > > ListCollectionView (we'll call it B) and point it to A, you can put > > filters > > on B without affecting A. > > > > -Josh > > > > On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 11:10 PM, Amy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > >> --- In [email protected], "Josh McDonald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > As long as ProgramModel.woCalSelectedDayData is bindable, the binding > >> will > >> > work. But you're only going to be getting a pointer to the same > >> object. Your > >> > "local" instance is the same instance as you would get with > >> > ProgramModel.getInstance().woCalSelectedDayData so any filters you > >> apply > >> > will also affect anything else that's bound to the same object. > >> > > >> > If you want local filtering, you will have to use a > >> ListCollectionView and > >> > bind its source to pm.woCalSelectedDayData. > >> > >> Since ArrayCollection extends ListCollectionView, what advantage to you > >> get from using a ListCollectionView with the same source as an > >> ArrayCollection vs. using a second ArrayCollection with the same source? > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------------ > >> > >> -- > >> Flexcoders Mailing List > >> FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt > >> Alternative FAQ location: > >> > https://share.acrobat.com/adc/document.do?docid=942dbdc8-e469-446f-b4cf-1e62079f6847 > >> 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." > > > > http://flex.joshmcdonald.info/ > > > > :: Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald > > :: 0437 221 380 :: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/-Bindable--is-not-getting-updated..-tp19600797p19650111.html > Sent from the FlexCoders mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > ------------------------------------ > > -- > Flexcoders Mailing List > FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt > Alternative FAQ location: > https://share.acrobat.com/adc/document.do?docid=942dbdc8-e469-446f-b4cf-1e62079f6847 > 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." http://flex.joshmcdonald.info/ :: Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald :: 0437 221 380 :: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
