Rather than setting up some kind of binding mechanism to the view
state, which still may be better (don't know), I'm doing something
like this, in which a Presenter (controller) puts the View in one of
its view states (using a public method defined on the View's
interface), and the parent loops through its child components to set
their view states to match.
// VIEW STATE Setter -- Called by Presenter to change view state for user
public function setViewState(state:String):void
{
//Sets parent's view state
this.currentState = state;
//Parent controls child component view states
// TODO: Make recursive to get through various wrapper
components
var children:Array=this.getChildren();
for (var i:String in children)
{
children[i].currentState = this.currentState;
}
}
Using this technique, the children would have to define the same view
states as the parent.
Is there a cleaner way? Is this unnecessarily processor intensive?
Please let me know.
Thanks,
Bruce
--
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/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> 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/
