Well let me weigh in where I can :)

·         You essentially create a Façade that handles 
registering/unregistering command classes. The job of this façade is to marry 
both an EventClass and CommandClass together (as well as echo the state of the 
applications mode - ie Initializing, Loaded etc).

·         A CommandClass is essentially a packet of Business Logic. It's job is 
to execute on a given role, in that it may ask the ModelLocator for state based 
information or it may request a service (via delegate pattern) to fire a remote 
response. It can also act as a payload for SubCommands as well (a Command can 
instantiate other commands within - via a Macro Command like pattern).

·         When you fire an Event via  Notification/Observer (ie in our case it 
just bubbles an event against a known index, so many Listeners can act on the 
same event) it will the FrontController will automatically interpret this event 
and fire the command it's married to via the executeCommand() method (or 
however you want to structure this).


So essentially you can be anywhere in the view so to speak (typically you want 
to marry a view with a viewhelper to promote re-use for the view vs simply a 
code-behind (this is more of code style though so it's got no hard fast rule 
here). The ViewHelper simply needs to fire a Notification event (via a 
singleton class) and the rest will orchestrate itself.

Now, the secret to the orchestration is that you want to have a Model which you 
bind your controls to, in that pretty much like old school DataSets, you simply 
bind the controls to properties within respective models. When you fire a 
command, what you want to do is via the executeCommand() update that given 
model as this will automatically update yoru view throughout (you can do some 
interesting binding routines here and get away with it). The trick for us 
however is you need to ensure the INotifyPropertyChanged is implemented in the 
Model, as you need to tell the controls that new data is in the model and they 
should refresh (we hope to clean this up in future releases may I add, as yes 
it's an absolute pain in the royal butt).

I plan on releasing some code via new project I've started called "Nexus" 
(which I'm extremely excited about and thank this list for inspiration for such 
an idea).

http://blogs.msdn.com/msmossyblog/archive/2008/09/19/introducing-ms-project-nexus.aspx


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Miguel Madero
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2008 7:11 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [OzSilverlight] A couple of questions

Scott,

Sounds interesting, specially for composite applications (a'la CAB), but I 
think that could be a bit complex for simpler views/apps, something like what 
Nikhil did with the Scripts was really simple and straightforward, the only 
disadvantage I saw was that it added heavy dependencies to the dlr.


 Miguel A. Madero Reyes
 www.miguelmadero.com<http://www.miguelmadero.com/> (blog)
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 (871)730-8319
 (871)763-0020
 Peten #509
 Fracc Florida Blanca, 27260
 Torreón, Coahuila
P "Please reconsider your environmental responsibility before printing this 
e-mail"
The information in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally privileged. 
It is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, 
any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be 
taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful.

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Barnes
Sent: Friday, 19 September 2008 3:52 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [OzSilverlight] A couple of questions

The other benefit of Commands is that essentially you can throw the same 
command from different areas within your View, which helps reduce coupling of 
the View with how the overall traffic flows within your Client.

You can build a FrontController class which marries both the Event and Command 
together today. Given that Silverlight has RoutedEvents, one could simply throw 
an Event (through a homemade EventDispatcher), the FrontController catches it 
and marries the event with a command and then the command fires a execute 
method. This in turn will carry out the workflow required in order to achieve a 
successful command delivery. Upon a result, the command can also throw another 
command (depending on the data returned) and so on.

This is good, as it essentially allows again multiple events to feed off the 
same commands (but yet have different semantic value) whilst at the same time 
keeping parts of the overall view abstracted from one another.

Martin Fowler's J2EE patterns have some good paths here to follow around this 
kind of thing.

Actually I feel a blog post + code brewing now.. stand by.. (*cracks fingers* - 
time to put my code where my mouth is!)


--
Scott Barnes
(Rich Platforms Product Manager)
Microsoft Corp.<http://www.microsoft.com/> | Blog: 
http://blogs.msdn.com/msmossyblog | Mobile: + 1 (425) 802-9503 (New!)
Twitter: twitter.com/mossyblog<http://twitter.com/mossyblog> | MSN: [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
P Please consider your environmental responsibility before printing this e-mail



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jonas Follesø
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 8:23 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [OzSilverlight] A couple of questions

Well, I can't answer for Jordan but I'll try to illustrate.

While using the Model-View-ViewModel pattern you have all your UI state and 
behavior in a separate class. This class is normally set as the data context on 
your View (XAML page), and you bind everything against this class. Even things 
like "IsSaveEnabled" to enable the save button.

The View communicates back to the ViewModel by commands. The benefit is that 
you don't have any "btnSave_Click" event handler in your codebehind. Instead 
your ViewModel waits for that Command to trigger, and then do the work.

The benefit of designing your application using these patterns is that you can 
build quite big applications with (almost) no code-behind. This makes your app 
easier to test, more maintainable, and easier to work with for a designer using 
Blend. So what is the problem? The problem is that there is no 
declarative(XAML) way of triggering animations when thing happens. So if you 
want to start a storyboard then the ViewModel IsBussy property is true, you 
will have to write this code by hand.

Typically that would involve listening to a PropertyChanged event in the 
codebehind of the form, and when the ViewModel IsBussy changes to true, then 
start the storyboard, when it changes to false, then stop it. This isn't the 
end of the world, but when we're so close to achieving no-code behind it would 
be nice to go all the way. Also, doing this forces your designer to have a 
stroyboard with that exact name (say ShowProgressanimation) present, so you as 
the developer ends up "owning" part of the user experience. If the designer 
accidentally deletes the storyboard the app will fail at runtime, or perhaps 
not even compile. The less named elements in your XAML file the better.

- Jonas

On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 1:12 PM, Barry Beattie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL 
PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> It's a PITA to make apps with all the bells and whistles in XAML then have
> to break M-V-VM to "finish" it off.
got an example to show what you mean? (just curious/wanting to learn)


------------------------------------------------------------------- 
OzSilverlight.com - to unsubscribe from this list, send a message back to the 
list with 'unsubscribe' as the subject.
Powered by mailenable.com<http://mailenable.com> - List managed by 
www.readify.net<http://www.readify.net>

------------------------------------------------------------------- 
OzSilverlight.com - to unsubscribe from this list, send a message back to the 
list with 'unsubscribe' as the subject.
Powered by mailenable.com - List managed by www.readify.net
------------------------------------------------------------------- 
OzSilverlight.com - to unsubscribe from this list, send a message back to the 
list with 'unsubscribe' as the subject.
Powered by mailenable.com - List managed by www.readify.net
------------------------------------------------------------------- 
OzSilverlight.com - to unsubscribe from this list, send a message back to the 
list with 'unsubscribe' as the subject.
Powered by mailenable.com - List managed by www.readify.net



------------------------------------------------------------------- 
OzSilverlight.com - to unsubscribe from this list, send a message back to the 
list with 'unsubscribe' as the subject.

Powered by mailenable.com - List managed by www.readify.net

Reply via email to