One possible answer (below)... great book by the way! John
On Aug 29, 2007, at 10:29 AM, droponrcll wrote: > --- In [email protected], "Tony" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Amy, >> >> This may be your place. >> >> Go for it! > > OK, first question: > > In Lesson 7 (p 162), we instantiate the PopupManager class from > inside a component. Wouldn't that cause problems accessing it from > other parts of the program, if you needed to? Or am I > misunderstanding the singleton class issue? > You're using static methods of the PopUpManager class, so I don't think it ever actually instantiates PopUpManager. If you want to access PopUpManager from elsewhere, just import it and use it. If you want to get to the popup that's created, that's a different story. I'm not sure why you'd want to do that, but I think PopUpManager keeps a list of it's popup's somewhere, that you might be able to get at. (Again, import PopUpManager and access it's properties/methods). > Second question: > > Later in Lesson 7 (p 172), we create an ArrayCollection just of > categories and then another ArrayCollection of Products arranced > under the key of the ID of the Category. Why are we not just adding > a Products property to each Category and storing the Products in > that? Maybe that's explained or corrected later, but that's as far > as I've read. :-) I haven't read much farther than here either, so I don't really have an answer. > Third question: > > It seems to me that all the looping in the logic described in my > second question is necessary because of a glaring hole in E4X. > Because all of the hype around E4X says it assumes that the order of > the XML nodes is important, yet when you use the .. operator, you > don't get back any information on where that node was found. Does > that hole actually exist, or is it just a hole in the docs for Flex? > If it does exist, has anyone extended E4X to fix this, and if so > could I get a link? If not, is it even possible (is the E4X logic in > a class that is extensible? > > OK, that last question was actually several questions, but maybe > someone can answer them, or at least take a stab. > > Thanks; > > Amy >
