|
I've debated with my boss about this 6 months ago
when I was put into the middle of a project. They had 3 Commands that did
A LOT of stuff. The typical setup was DB driven design. Most people
on the team come from strong CF backgrounds. As such, the client
architecture fits really well into this. The CFC's, Delegate's, and
Commands are all almost seamless in methods. Since we have about 4 core
CFC's that drive most of our logic, from a server-side developer perpsective,
this is quite nice. The CFC gives me the data, the Delegate shoves it
through a factory to clean up pre-CF 7.0.2's mess, the Command's set the
appropriate data.
The thing I changed almost immediately when I came
on board is implementing Event classes. This is in Flex 1.5, mind you, so
these aren't typically used. However, the insane amount of Constant values
used in the FontController were really hard to grasp. It took me about 2
months to really get "comfortable" in the code base because it was so
huge. That was quick, in my opinion, considering their architect was
extremely anal retentive, and this paid off; everything followed standards, and
my expectations grew strong because everything followed the same pattern.
The Event classes took it a step further, because now I had context on what "I
wanted to happen" when dispatching it. The FrontController is a lot easier
to read, now too because you can get a better idea of what the events are really
causing to happen.
Concrete example? Nope... but what really IS
concrete in programming? My boss told me to do it that way, we debated
heavily, and I gave in because I didn't have enough good ammo, nor clout at the
time, to really make an architectual impact to an already old, huge, and
working well, code base. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. He does
heavily support refactoring, though, so he was, and still is, open minded, as am
I.
I actually really don't have a strong opinion
either way. While many commands are lighter weight and more specifc, I
think most have a common theme on what they are doing, at least with our
app. Thus, being in the same Command class is comforting as there is a lot
of similiar methods nearby that remind me of what other parts are doing;
remember, we're all using the same Delegate class, just calling different
methods on the same CFC. I had an older Flash app I did in ARP where we
calling a lot of un-related Java class methods. So, this made sense.
I understand Commands are supposed to be implied user actions, and in this case,
they basically were since every Java method (about 30) did something
specific. 23'ish of them were user specific actions where the rest
were behind the scenes data management jazz. ...so, I can see where both
angles work. I've been heads down for 6 months in 4 commands, so, forrest
for the trees, ya know?
----- Original Message -----
From: Steven Webster
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 3:55 PM
Subject: RE: [flexcoders] Re: WebService & Cairngorm 2
Example I don't necessarily agree here with Jesse; for me, a
Command is most useful when it's an implementation of a single use-case, and
when it executes in context, and handles it's results in context. If there
is functionality that is shared between commands, then I'd either move that
functionality into a base command, or into a class that can be used by multiple
commands. I don't however, like the idea of coalescing multiple commands
into one, or that the motivation for doing this being "having a lot of
classes".
For those new to Cairngorm, I'd strongly advocate following
the patterns as we've presented them, rather than commands switching their
behavior as you describe here Jesse.
Can you share a concrete example where you think there's
valid reason to coalesce the commands ?
Steven
__._,_.___ -- Flexcoders Mailing List FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com
SPONSORED LINKS
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
|
- Re: [flexcoders] Re: WebService & Cairngorm 2 Example Carlos Rovira
- RE: [flexcoders] Re: WebService & Cairngorm 2 Exam... Steven Webster
- Re: [flexcoders] Re: WebService & Cairngorm 2 ... JesterXL
