Hi, You could have the buttons "enabled" property and panels "visibility" property bound to the model.
That seems to be the recommended way. Sammi Derrick Grigg wrote: > > The biggest things I need to do are update/change the state of views > within the application. For instance, when a user has logged in > certain buttons get enabled, or certain panels become visible that > would not be so when the user is logged out. > > I was thinking along the lines of using Commands, but I don't think > Commands should be concerned about the specific details (ie text > fields, buttons, etc) of a view. Using Commands would also entail > having to register all my views with a locator that would be used to > allow the Commands to find Views. Seems like a huge pain. > > To me it seems much cleaner to allow the views to listen for certain > events (likely dispatched from a Manager) and then respond accordingly. > > Derrick > > --- In [email protected] > <mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>, "Dustin Mercer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > Out of curiosity, what is it you want to do when the login happens. I > > have only found a few things that were difficult to do from within a > > command. If you can tell me what you want to do, I can tell you what I > > have done in the past and how I accomplished it from within a command. > > In my Cairngorm trials, I had come to some of the same thinking as you > > described here, but I found that there were ways to accomplish it within > > the command instead of a management class. There were situations I > > chose to implement management classes though, for example, I had a class > > that managed all the media playing on a media player I am building... > > It just didn't feel right broken into commands, just didn't feel very > > cohesive, although accomplishable through commands, just felt better in > > a singleton class.... Especially since I was going to be using these > > same functions across many different commands and didn't want to rewrite > > the logic in each command. > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: [email protected] > <mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com> > [mailto:[email protected] > <mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>] On > > Behalf Of Derrick Grigg > > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 12:11 PM > > To: [email protected] <mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com> > > Subject: [flexcoders] Cairngorm, dispatching application events and > > managing states > > > > > > > > Here's a question for any Cairngorm devotees to weigh in on. > > > > I have an application that has many seperate parts that function > > independently of each other. Each part uses the centralized Cairngorm > > fare (FrontController, ModelLocator, Commands etc). For most parts > > using the ModelLocator and bound properties (ie > > dataProvider={model.users}) works perfect for keeping everything in > > order. > > > > One case where this seems to fall apart is when one part or the shell > > application needs to notify the other parts of something that has > > happened. For example, a user logs into the application. I can update > > the model.user to reflect a value object for the new user and the > > various components that need to update on this do, BUT, what to do > > when I need something programatic to occur in one of the parts. > > > > I have tried unsuccessfully to use the 'mx.binding' classes. I think > > the issue there is that when you initially set the binding it is set > > to a specific instance of an object (ie model.user). When the user > > logs in I typically completely replace the model.user with a new user > > instance, which kills the bindings. The only way around this is to > > never replace object instances in the model but rather update them. > > Thinking this through though, that seems like a ticking time bomb. Any > > accidental overwrite of a instance in the model and all the bindings > > falls apart. > > > > What I have done in past, pre Cairngorm, applications it to create > > Manager classes, based on the Singleton pattern, that can dispatch > > events, and perform logic that doesn't really belong in a command or > > business delegate. For example an ApplicationManager class that can > > dispatch 'loggedIn' and 'loggedOut' events. Any part of the > > application can register as a listener and act appropriately upon > > receiving the event. > > > > My question then (to get to the point), is using a Manager class like > > this considered a best practice in the Cairngorm framework (mindframe) > > or is there a better or more acceptable method of doing what I would > > like to accomplish? > > > > Thanks in advance for any feedback, > > > > Derrick > > > > -- 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/
