You could always extend ArrayCollection so that the extended-AC notifies its bound objects when its Array source changes. It depends whether you want the code change made to the 'source' of the data (in which case you'd update the AC, not the Array, as Tom mentioned), or the 'destination' (change the source Array on extended-AC).
_______________________________________________________________ Joseph Balderson, Flash Platform Developer | http://joeflash.ca Tom McNeer wrote: > Jonathan, > > Thanks very much for your clear and thorough explanation. > > One of the major difficulties of discussing matters like this, of > course, is semantics. Many common words we might use to describe > apparent actions - like "update" or "refresh" -- have such specific > meanings within the context of Flex -- often naming specific methods, in > fact -- that someone like me, who is relatively new to Flex and > ActionScript, may misspeak (and mislead) by referring to things incorrectly. > > I understand that the key concept is whether an object "knows" that > something has happened. I mistakenly thought that the AC "knew" that its > source had changed, but the Repeater didn't "know" that the AC had changed. > > You've straightened me out: the AC didn't "know" its source had changed, > and therefore didn't communicate to any other object. > > The easiest solution is to use the AC directly to change the data. > > > > Thanks. I understand. I'll have to think about whether that's > appropriate in this case, since a change in the source array would > actually be generated by the addition of an object from a wholly > different area of the app. > > But you've given me more understanding, and a good rule of thumb: when > something doesn't appear to be updating, it probably hasn't been told to. > > -- > Thanks, > > Tom > > Tom McNeer > MediumCool > http://www.mediumcool.com > 1735 Johnson Road NE > Atlanta, GA 30306 > 404.589.0560
