This isn't technically a module question. I believe that you will find
the same behavior if you were to "new" a frameworks class and then try
to access it. Did you call "addChild()" on the product of the factory?
I'd get that working first in a simple hard-linked case.
Note that you may well run into issues if you try to make a
frameworks-based module that doesn't extend mx:Module. There is some
codegen magic that happens in that case that doesn't happen if you
extend the more stripped-down ModuleBase.
-rg
________________________________
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of tvikatos
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 12:51 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [flexcoders] Re: Problem with module classes
instantiation through ModuleManager
Anyone expert in modules, has a clue?
Is ModuleManager and the factory you get when loading a module,
supposed to work with AS-only modules?
We are generally lacking documentation and examples with the
ModuleManager...
--- In [email protected]
<mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com> , "tvikatos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I have a module that combines mxml and as3. The problem I
describe
> below happens in either case:
> * main module file in AS extending ModuleBase
> * main module file in MXML extending mx:Module
>
> When I load the module using ModuleLoader and its 'child'
property,
> all is good.
> When I use ModuleManager and I instantiate a module object
through
> IModuleInfo.factory.create(), the objects defined as MXML tags
within
> my module are not instantiated (properties remain null).
> Is there something I can do to properly instantiate the module
> (something that apparently ModuleLoader does behind the
scene)?
>
> Or should I just not use any MXML with modules?
>
