Hi Alex,
Thank you very much for addressing this topic in your blog.
Using
observe and ObserveValue seems much cleaner than
viewLocator/viewHelper; more direct and less classes. Your examples
illustrate a very useful technique for manipulating local view
states
through binding. I wasn't however, able to view the source
for Iteration6.
It shows a partial listing of the application mxml
class, but no other
classes and download options.
Kudos,
-TH
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com,
"Alex Uhlmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED].>
wrote:
>
> Hey
Guys,
>
> FYI, I've just blogged about this topic.
>
http://weblogs.macromedia.com/auhlmann/archives/2006/09/cairngorm_sam
pl_
>
3.cfm
>
http://weblogs.macromedia.com/auhlmann/archives/2006/09/using_binding
_s.
>
cfm
>
> Best,
> Alex
>
> Alex Uhlmann
>
Consultant (Rich Internet Applications)
> Adobe Consulting
>
Westpoint, 4 Redheughs Rigg,
> South Gyle, Edinburgh, EH12 9DQ,
UK
> p: +44 (0) 131 338 6969
> m: +44 (0) 7917 428 951
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://weblogs.macromedia.com/auhlmann
>
>
>
>
________________________________
>
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com]
On
> Behalf Of Tim Hoff
> Sent: 18 September 2006 16:35
> To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com
>
Subject: [flexcoders] Re: cairngorm: calling a function in a view
>
>
>
> That would be fantastic Alex. Thank you for your
thoughts
> concerning this topic. I look forward to reading your
blog.
>
> -TH
>
> --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com
<mailto:flexcoders%
40yahoogroups.com>
> , "Alex Uhlmann"
<auhlmann@>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi there,
>
>
> > I'd suggest letting the Command retrieve a model object
via
> > ModelLocator. Then, some state property in the model changes
which
> could
> > trigger an event. Views could listen to
either EventDispatcher
> events or
> > via Bindings. Following
the Binding approach, your view could
bind
> to
> > single
properties, call methods on the view via function
bindings
> or
if
> > you explicitly want to let the view react to a model's state
> change with
> > calling a view method (i.e. invoking an effect
or popup), which
> doesn't
> > necessarily return a value to a
MXML component, you can use
> mx:Binding
> > or Paul's Observe
tag.
> > http://weblogs.macromedia.com/paulw/
>
<http://weblogs.macromedia.com/paulw/>
> > Tim, you're right. I'll hopefully get to post something about
this
> later
> > this week.
> >
> >
Best,
> > Alex
> >
> > Alex Uhlmann
> >
Consultant (Rich Internet Applications)
> > Adobe Consulting
>
> Westpoint, 4 Redheughs Rigg,
> > South Gyle, Edinburgh, EH12 9DQ,
UK
> > p: +44 (0) 131 338 6969
> > m: +44 (0) 7917 428
951
> > auhlmann@
> > http://weblogs.macromedia.com/auhlmann
>
<http://weblogs.macromedia.com/auhlmann>
> >
> >
> >
> >
________________________________
> >
> > From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com
<mailto:flexcoders%
40yahoogroups.com>
>
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com
<mailto:flexcoders%
40yahoogroups.com>
> ] On
> >
Behalf Of Tim Hoff
> > Sent: 18 September 2006 04:29
> > To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com
<mailto:flexcoders%
40yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject:
[flexcoders] Re: cairngorm: calling a function in a view
> >
>
>
> >
> > Yes, your login example illustrates a common
way to drive the
view
> > through the ModelLocator. However, I
agree with you that it
would
> > be cleaner to have a view method
to do this sort of thing
instead
> of
> > a huge model with
lots of references. The only problem with
> > referencing a view
function directly from a command, is that if
> you
> > remove
the view or the function, the command breaks (violates
> >
encapsulation). If you really wanted to do this from a command
>
> though, you could traverse the display list ID's like so (not
> >
recommended):
> >
> >
Application.application.viewMain.viewRef.resetForm();
>
>
> > An alternative would be to dispatch a custom event, from the
> > command, that would be listened for by the view. I've addressed
> > this issue here before. My personal opinion is that a responder
> > that goes from the command, through the FrontController, to the
> > view, would be very helpful for these types of functions. The
> > Cairngorm experts here haven't really provided much guidance,
> either
> > through samples or blog postings, in this area.
Perhaps as more
> > people, like you, ask similar questions, more
insight will be
> > provided. Until then, since we want to remain as
true to the
> > Cairngorm architecture as possible, binding all state
(local and
> > shared) to the ModelLocator seems to be the recommended
solution.
> >
> > Thanks for the post,
> >
-TH
> >
> > --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com
>
<mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:flexcoders%
> 40yahoogroups.com>
> > , "Diego
Guebel"
> > <dguebel.subscription@> wrote:
> >
>
> > > Hi Tim,
> > > this might be a silly
example:
> > > I have a login form, when the command responds
onFault I want
to
> > able to
> > > reset the user
and password textfields.
> > > doing something like:
> >
> viewRef.resetForm();
> > >
> > > you might
suggest to do something like this in the view:
> > >
<mx:TextInput id="username" text="{login.username}"/>
>
> > <mx:TextInput id="password"
text="{login.password}"/>
> > >
> > > and
something like this in the command:
> > > public function
onFault(event:* = null):void
> > > {
> > >
model.login.username = "";
> > > model.login.password =
"";
> > > }
> > >
> > > I think this is the
best practice, but I was just wondering as
> I'm
> > moving
> > > from Arp where you have a view reference in the command and
is
> > really
> > > common to do things like
viewRef.method()
> > > something I think it would be clearer to
have a method to do
> this
> > sort of
> > > thing
instead of a huge model with lots of references....
> > >
> > > Diego.
> > >
> > >
> >
> On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 10:17:41 +1200, Tim Hoff <TimHoff@>
wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Diego,
> > >
>
> > > > In general a Command and a View shouldn't know about
each
> other.
> > > > Usually, the state of a view is
changed by binding to the
> > > > ModelLocator; which is updated
by a Command. What does your
> view
> > > > function
do?
> > > >
> > > > -TH
> > >
>
> > > > --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com
>
<mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>
> >
<mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com> , "Diego Guebel"
>
> > > <dguebel.subscription@> wrote:
> > >
>>
> > > >> Hi there,
> > > >> I
wonder what would be the best way to call a function in a
> view
>
> > > when I
> > > >> get a result in a
command.
> > > >> what is the way to have a reference to the
view in the
command
> > > > since
> > > >>
viewlocator/viewhelper is not more recommended?
> > > >>
Thanks, Diego.
> > > >>
> > > >
> >
> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
--
> > > > Flexcoders Mailing List
> > > > FAQ:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt
>
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt>
> > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt
>
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt>
>
> > > > Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%
>
<http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%>
> > <http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%
>
<http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%>
>
> > 40yahoogroups.com
> > > > Yahoo! Groups
Links
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
>
>
>
