It would be interesting to see a PureMVC vs Cairngorm implementation
comparison.
But i believe this is a general MVC question.
The way i see the responsibilities in this case is you have 2 views.
(n) Components and 1 Mediator. The mediator would be responsible for
updating your component setters and routing its dispatched events.
Your controller updates your model after receiving notification from
the view mediator.
The model would store your property and would have the Mediator
'bound' to that property.
regards,
Bjorn
On 22/11/2007, at 8:57 AM, Sebastian Zarzycki wrote:
Can you elaborate a bit more on this? This is in no way starting
some kind
of flame. If you claim that such problems are solved easily, can
you please
tell us more about it? Since you've apparently used both, some kind of
comparison would be EXTREMELY appreciated from my side. How does
PureMVC
solves modularity, does it introduce strong coupling, does it use flex
features (binding, etc), what are drawbacks, how about changing
states,
reusability?
I know there is a lot of documentation on the site, but I still
value the
experienced user's opinion most.
-----Original Message---
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of tomeuchre
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 10:15 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [flexcoders] Re: Managing States and Cairngorm
--- In [email protected], "Sebastian Zarzycki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> I'm fighting with this as well.
I switched from Cairngorm to PureMVC and never looked back. It is so
much easier, logical and re-usable, and little things like this never
pop up anymore.
I'll never go back...
--
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
