I've not seen anything saying 'Cairngorm is 1 to 1 e-c-d' steadfastly. Why can't a single event be registered with say 2 commands? Event initialiseApplicationEvent could be registered with fetchUSStatesCommand(), fetchFoodChoicesCommand(), and fetchOpenDinnerDatesCommand(). Asynchronous vs synchronous topics aside, seems ok to me.
DK On 10/23/07, Bjorn Schultheiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hey Doug, > > My backend is mainly DAO's and I've got one delegate pers DAO in my > company lib, that gets used across multiple projects. > > But I'm pretty sure thats not Cairngorm. > > Cairngorm is 1 to 1 e-c-d. > > > regards, > > Bjorn > > > On 23/10/2007, at 2:33 PM, Douglas Knudsen wrote: > > me2 :) I usually use one delegate per application or major division of > the app, eg Modules. This delegate can access how ever many services it > needs to to do the job. Further, it can rely on utility classes to massage > incoming data if need be too. Now if I have to switch from WebService to > RemoteObject, only need to create one new delegate to use, eh? bamm! > > DK > > On 10/22/07, ben.clinkinbeard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Yea, I just don't buy into that. I am all for short files and clear > > separation of responsibilities, but I don't see what > > single-method-delegates buys you. My delegates are pretty dumb, they > > just contain methods that take params and pass em along to web > > methods. I don't access the model or anything inside my delegates. To > > each his own obviously but I just don't think I will ever be sold on > > that division. I guess I'm a Cairngorm rebel. :) > > > > > > Ben > > > > --- In [email protected] <flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>, Bjorn > > Schultheiss > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Hey Ben, > > > > > > > > > The Idea is that even if you are calling the same webservice you are > > > to create a new delegate. > > > > > > The sequence is Event - Command - Delegate. > > > > > > Not saying that i follow it, but I'm sure in it's strictest > > > implementation its 1 to 1. > > > > > > > > > Check this > > > http://jessewarden.<http://jessewarden.com/2007/08/10-tips-for-working-with-cairngorm.html> > > com/2007/08/10-tips-for-working-with-cairngorm.html > > > 6. There are 3 ways to use Commands & Delegates. I prefer A because > > > it's consistent, leads to short class files, and is very explicit. > > > A) For every use case, you make 1 Command and 1 Event. This can > > > sometimes also mean 1 Delegate. (ie, LoginEvent, LoginCommand, > > > LoginDelegate) > > > > > > > > > Anyone from AC care to confirm? > > > > > > > > > > > > On 23/10/2007, at 12:08 PM, ben.clinkinbeard wrote: > > > > > > > > the 1 to 1 event-command-delegate methodology > > > > > > > > I've heard that mentioned indirectly a couple of times before but > > > > don't remember ever reading it as a suggested methodology. Maybe I > > > > just missed that instruction but I don't follow that practice. I > > have > > > > one delegate per Web Service, so several Commands end up using the > > > > same Delegate. > > > > > > > > As a general practice, I think Commands are very often an > > appropriate > > > > and efficient approach. > > > > > > > > I haven't looked into PureMVC yet but would like to at some point. > > > > That being said, I've also not really encountered any situations > > where > > > > I felt Cairngorm was restricting me from accomplishing anything. > > > > > > > > Ben > > > > > > > > --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] <flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>ups.com, > > Bjorn Schultheiss > > > > <bjorn.mailinglists@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hey All, > > > > > > > > > > I don't know if there has been a previous thread on this. I'm > > > > > assuming there is but i thought i'd start one again in light of > > some > > > > > recent blog posts about a Silvafug meeting by the assertTrue guys > > on > > > > > frameworks. > > > > > > > > > > http://www.asserttr<http://www.asserttrue.com/articles/2007/10/17/silvafug-application-> > > ue.com/articles/2007/10/17/silvafug-application- > > > > > frameworks-presentation > > > > > http://probertson.<http://probertson.com/articles/2007/10/18/flex-application-> > > com/articles/2007/10/18/flex-application- > > > > frameworks- > > > > > presentations/ > > > > > http://www.sephirot<http://www.sephiroth.it/weblog/archives/2007/10/flex_frameworks.php> > > h.it/weblog/archives/2007/10/flex_frameworks.php > > > > > > > > > > I haven't used PureMVC yet but I have used Cairngorm for a while > > > > > (since the flash 7 days). > > > > > > > > > > I will say I've got a few beefs with Cairngorm and from just > > looking > > > > > at the PureMVC diagram i already see a few solutions. > > > > > > > > > > I guess my main beefs with cairngorm has been the use of commands. > > > > > Specifically in creating Re-usable commands. > > > > > the 1 to 1 event-command-delegate methodology has never sat well > > > > with > > > > > me. > > > > > > > > > > Dumb Models (vo collections) is another. > > > > > > > > > > Support for unit testing in the View is another. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyone care to help start a discussion? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > > > Bjorn > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Douglas Knudsen > http://www.cubicleman.com > this is my signature, like it? > > > -- Douglas Knudsen http://www.cubicleman.com this is my signature, like it?
