I prefer String over int, because it is selfdocumenting, so i'd go for
states rather than viewstack.selectedIndex
Cheers
Ralf.


On Nov 22, 2007 1:08 PM, stephen50232 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi Seb,
>
>  Thanks, I've now created a static const in my ModelLocator class which
>  , is called APP_DEFAULT_STATE, which I'm using to load in the
>  Application.currentState. So now I can switch between states fine, thanks.
>
>  One question though is Cairngorm good with managing states or is it
>  better suited to using the viewstack to manage how an application looks?
>
>
>  --- In [email protected], "Sebastian Zarzycki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>  wrote:
>  >
>
>  > Not really, unless you can give yourself a good explanation, why you
>  don't
>  > want to pass the value. The default logic for this behavior is a bit too
>  > complicated (if, then). I assume your app is small, but as it grows, you
>  > might be confused what's going on, since there is no clear
>  explanation in
>  > code, that you are switching to Login state. If your Login state is the
>  > default one (starting), remember that you can always refer to it as "".
>  > Create a final string APP_DEFAULT_LOGIN_STATE = "" and use this constant
>  > even on start - this way you will know what is going on, and there is no
>  > need to create additional check in command's logic.
>  >
>  > -----Original Message-----
>  > From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>  > Behalf Of stephen50232
>  > Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2007 10:26 AM
>  > To: [email protected]
>  > Subject: [flexcoders] Re: Managing States and Cairngorm
>  >
>  > Hi Seb,
>  >
>  > Thanks for the reply, I like you idea, it makes sense. If I create an
>  > event which is fired during start up a I can in theory reuse the same
>  > event in the menu I'm creating. All it will be doing is passing the
>  > name of the state to change to.
>  >
>  > One thing I will do is when the event is fired during start up I won't
>  > pass a value for the state name, then in my Command I can check for
>  > this value and as it doesn't exist I can call the default state
>  > (Login). Do you think this is a good idea?
>  >
>  > Stephen
>  >
>
>
>
>  



-- 
Ralf Bokelberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Flex & Flash Consultant based in Cologne/Germany
Phone +49 (0) 221 530 15 35

Reply via email to