Thank you for your answer. When you said you had several "sub-apps",
those were Modules or Applications? I have seen people using
Applications instead of Modules, because they felt more comfortable
while testing - but this way they end up with bigger SWF's.
Having the services on the Main App won't create a tight coupled
architecture between the module and the app ?
In your architecture, have you used Modular? If yes, when you need to
have a command (which is defined on the module) that calls a
ServiceDelegate (which is defined on the application) how do you solve
the problem that the Module doesn't know the ServiceDelegate?.
Thanks,
João Saleiro
sLangeberg wrote:
We had no problems implementing a system similar to your description:
One 'portal' app loads multiple mudular 'sub-apps' at runtime. Each is
standalone cairngorm app. As you said, however, the biggest gotcha is
one big shared ServiceLocator at the main app level. In our case,
wasn't big deal, as I think there's only about one remote object per
module, for us. Not much more, anyhow, as each is a full controller /
for the respective service on the back-end. Wouldn't be hard to
implement your own ServiceLocators that impl same interface, but
allows you to have one per module, and could be their own Singletons.
It' just an odd setup, as they wanted to implement an MXML definition
for services.
On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 7:05 PM, João Saleiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
Hey guys,
I am working on a Flex application based on Cairngorm. The application
will be divided in modules for the purpose of distributing only the
modules clients request. There will be a configuration tool on the
application to "install" new modules, and manage existing ones. The
motivation for using modules is to manage properly the complexity
of the
application while it grows and to help managing the roles on the team
assigning each module to different persons.
The first question is whether I should have:
a) One Flex Project that has the application and several modules;
b) One Flex Project for each module and another for the application;
c) One Flex Project for all modules, and another for the application;
I think the best option is to go with b). What do you think?
Second question: which of the following seems a preferable practice:
a) Only the application uses MVC
b) The application and each module have it's own MVC architecture
I would go with option b). The problem is that MVC has some Singletons
and that will create problems, since I would have, for example, one
Controller for the application and another for each Module.
To solve this problem, I can use Modular -
http://lab.arc90.com/2007/10/modular_1.php
Modular will work as a proxy for the Controller, allowing to register
new commands on runtime on the main application controller. Those
commands will be defined on my Module. In terms of use, it seems
practical and logic to me, but in terms of architecture, it seems
a bit
wrong to me - wouldn't it be preferable if each module had it's own
controller? Why should the module depend so much on the
application that
uses it? What happens if the module is used on an application that
doesn't use Cairngorm?... It's a bit questionable if Modular should be
used or not.
Anyway, even if I went with this option, Modular doesn't provide a
solution for the ServiceLocator. So, this leads me to another
question:
a) Only the application knows the backend and the services provided by
the backend; So, there will be only one ServiceLocator and all the
ServiceDelegates will be defined on the main application.
b) Each module knows the backend, and each module has it's own
ServiceLocator and specific ServiceDelegates for the remote services
needed on that module.
I think the option b) seems more elegant to me. The problem is
that the
ServiceLocator implemented on Cairngorm is a Singleton, and the same
happens with the ModelLocator. Since our implementations extend the
classes on Cairngorm, even if I create "different" ServiceLocators for
each module, that won't solve the problem since they are all one
instance - they all extend the same ServiceLocator class. And I
need one
ServiceLocator per module. I could solve that by not extending the
same
base class... but this doesn't sound correct to me, since I would have
to replicate the ServiceLocator code on each module... Can you propose
another solution?
I think there is lack of information on best-practices for developing
big modular applications using modules and MVC. I am a bit stuck right
now, since I need to make some important decisions on architecture
before starting the development, and I do not want to change all the
architecture later. Your opinion would be extremely helpful to me!
Thank you!,
João Saleiro
_______________________________________________
osflash mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
--
: : ) Scott
Helping your grandma on the interweb
at: http://blog.criticalpile.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
osflash mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
_______________________________________________
osflash mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
