Making the delegate a singleton solved the problem. Thank you very much for the insight.
- TH --- In [email protected], "JesterXL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hrm... good point. Typicaly this: > > function test() > { > a = new String(); > } > > test(); > test(); > > Will cause the first created a to be destroyed & replaced with a new one. I > reckon the old one is marked for garbage collection. > > However, "think" is dangerous. I can see how for 99% of the use cases you'd > want a Delegate to be a singleton to be utilized from a command, so that > makes perfect sense; good idea! > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tim Hoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 1:23 PM > Subject: [flexcoders] Re: Cairngorm2 Commands and Singletons > > > That's what I thought Jester. So the problem is not with the > commands but rather with the delegates. The samples provided > similar code to this: > > var delegate : GetAuthorsDelegate = new GetAuthorsDelegate(); > > I'll make these singletons and see if that clears up the problem. > > Thanks, > > - TH > > > --- In [email protected], "JesterXL" <jesterxl@> wrote: > > > > Cairngorm at start up creates a single instance of a command class > at start > > up. > > > > ARP, another framework like Cairngorm, creates an instance of a > command when > > it's called. > > > > Multiple calls to a Cairngorm command via EventBroacaster use the > same > > Command instance. > > > > Multiple calls to an ARP command via EventBroacaster use a new > Command > > instance. > > > > While I've been told Commands should be stateless, I disagree. > Since you > > can't block in Flash Player and everything is asyncronous, I think > Commands > > should have some form of state, even if this state is internal, > and is > > merely in the form of callback functions that it only uses for > itself (aka > > private). > > > > That said, Cairngorm's low-level design clearly believes and > encourages > > stateless Commands since only 1 instance of a Command class every > exists. > > > > Cairngorm keeps a reference to the Command class instances, so > they don't > > really ever go out of scope because they are kept internally in > the commands > > array. > > > > I know that's not a solution, just information, but figured > important > > nonetheless. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Tim Hoff" <TimHoff@> > > To: <[email protected]> > > Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 12:46 PM > > Subject: [flexcoders] Cairngorm2 Commands and Singletons > > > > > > Apparently, there has been much discussion concerning singletons > > here already, but the search feature of this site doesn't seem to > > ever return complete results. Coming from a .NET background, I've > > had to change a lot my thinking in regards to objects. This is a > > good thing. However, in .NET (VB.NET, C#.NET Java.NET) when an > > object is instantiated, let's say a class in this case, as soon as > > the object goes out of scope, it is automatically disposed of by > the > > garbageCollector. This doesn't seem to be the case in AS3. I've > > patterned an application on the Cairngorm samples that have been > > provided so far. The samples are great and I really appreciate > > them, but none of them make multiple calls to the back-end. Using > > the code provided, if I execute multiple search commands (let's say > > getAuthors), each one of the command instances, along with the > > associated event listeners and objects, still exist after the > result > > or fault is returned. Thus, when an error is displayed > > like: "Sorry, no authors found.", since all of the > > commands/delegates are still listening to the data service, a > > separate alert box appears for each instance of the command. Three > > calls, three alert boxes. > > > > I'm not sure if I should make the commands and delegates > singletons, > > or manually dispose (delete _oSingleton) of the instances. Since > > the application is Cairngorm based, I don't want to stray too far > > from best practices. I was just wondering if anyone else had > > experienced this problem and if there were some links or advice > that > > could be offered? I also want to say that I think that the Adobe > > team is doing a great job. I can't wait for the release of Flex2. > > It's going to turn a lot of heads. > > > > Many thanks, > > Tim Hoff > > > > P.S. It would be nice to have something like the following: > > > > public singleton class myClass {} > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Flexcoders Mailing List > > FAQ: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt > > Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders% > 40yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > -- > Flexcoders Mailing List > FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt > Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders% 40yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > -- Flexcoders Mailing List FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
