> 3) Why exactly are u looking to do?
-Have one event type 'task' that handles multiple usages
-Event usages:
-Display all (update arrayCollection)
-Display one in detail (update instance of a VO)
-Add task (add instance of VO to the arrayCollection)
-Edit task (update database for instance of VO)
-Delete task (remove instance of VO from db and arrayCollection)
-Try to understand if one command can be written well to handle these
situations, or if it is better to have a command for each scenario
which all tie in to the same event type
Below is some of the pieces of code I have for the 'generic command'
approach that might help for discussion.
//TaskEvent.as
package com.events {
import com.adobe.cairngorm.control.CairngormEvent;
import com.vo.PersonVO;
import com.vo.TaskVO;
public class TaskEvent extends CairngormEvent {
public static var TASK_ADD:String = "TaskAdd";
public static var TASK_EDIT:String = "TaskEdit";
public static var TASK_DELETE:String = "TaskDelete";
public var User:PersonVO;
public var Task_Update:TaskVO;
public function TaskEvent(p_type:String, p_User:PersonVO,
p_Update:TaskVO) {
super(p_type, false, true);
User = p_User;
Task_Update = p_Update;
}
}
}
package com.commands
{
import com.adobe.cairngorm.commands.Command;
import com.adobe.cairngorm.business.Responder;
import com.adobe.cairngorm.control.CairngormEvent;
import com.model.ModelLocator;
import com.business.TaskDelegate;
import com.events.TaskEvent;
import com.vo.PersonVO;
import com.vo.TaskVO;
import mx.rpc.events.ResultEvent;
import mx.rpc.events.FaultEvent;
import mx.utils.ArrayUtil;
import mx.collections.ArrayCollection;
public class TaskCommand implements Command, Responder {
public function execute(p_event:CairngormEvent):void {
switch(p_event.type) {
case TaskEvent.TASK_ADD:
TaskAdd(TaskEvent(p_event).User,
TaskEvent(p_event).Details);
break;
case TaskEvent.TASK_DELETE:
TaskDelete(TaskEvent(p_event).User,
TaskEvent(p_event).Details);
break;
}
}
//Skipped the actual content of TaskAdd / TaskDelete functions
}
Tom's reply leads me to believe there is a way to do the equivelent -
from my coding example - of having a TaskAdd_onResult,
TaskDelete_onResult and TaskAdd_onFault, TaskDelete_onFault within the
same command rather than having to separate out. But how is not quite
clear to me.
