The transfer objects will work using ColdSpring's remoting provided you provide a getTO() method. You don't need to have cfproperty for CS's remoting to work. Currently CS requires that you have method named getTO() which returns a struct of your instance data to convert into an AS object. Soon CS will support the user defining the name of the method to call to retrieve this struct.
I really don't like cfproperty because it exposes all attributes publicly in your objects. I prefer getters and setters. Since it is a transfer object it doesn't seem bad that cfproperty is used. --Kurt On 2/20/06, Doug Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > João - > > The all-string nature of the records is intentional and I don't plan to > change that. I really think your best bet might be to use the TOs, now that > they have cfproperty tags. > > You know how you can simply go to a cfc?wsdl to see any of it's remote > methods? That data you see is the metadata defined by the various > attributes on your cffunction and cfargument tags. > > The cfproperty essentially does that for variables in the "this" scope. So, > no, setting cfproperty wont impact the record functions - they define their > own metadata. > > I need to leave the record functions as accepting strings because they're > intended to back HTML forms. I can't rightly expect an HTML-user to provide > a validly formatted date or number every time. That's why I have the > validate method - to insure the data really is valid. > > So, you can still use reactor by simply getting the TOs from the records. > In fact, I'm pretty sure that the "service stuff" (I haven't dug into this > so I can't be more descriptive) in coldspring has formal mechanisms for > getting TOs. It might be worth reading up on that and bugging the CS guys > (and maybe Simeon) about this. > > All-in-all, using the TOs via ColdSpring seems like it would be a good way > to work with ActionScript, though I don't have the faintest idea if it will > work with the CF adaptor for Flex 2. > > Doug > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of João > Fernandes > Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 8:01 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [Reactor For CF] RE: Reactor For CF And now for Sean > > The problem seems that reactor "record" object uses string (like TO's) for > all getters/setters and I don't think that AS3 will like that,well, I can > use it but then in the client side I'll just have strings for everything. > > It's not the first time I'm asking stuff about AS3 because soon I'll start > 100% development on it and CF as middle tier and I was hoping Reactor could > be the choice. I still have to figure how reactor objects (Records or TO's) > should be defined for this to work because I don't know if AS3 recognizes > getters/setters with the corresponding datatype or if <cfproperty is still > needed to describe it correctly. > > Maybe Sean can clear this out, > > Thanks anyway, > > João Fernandes > Sistemas de Informação > > Programador Informático > Cofina media > > Avenida João Crisóstomo, Nº 72 . 1069-043 Lisboa PORTUGAL > Tel (+351) 213 185 200 . Fax (+351) 213 540 370 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Doug > Hughes > Sent: terça-feira, 21 de Fevereiro de 2006 0:31 > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [Reactor For CF] RE: Reactor For CF And now for Sean > > A record should never expose its data directly via cfproperty. If AS3 will > recognize getters/setters then that's good enough, you have the data you > need. > > However, the TO should work now too. > > Doug > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of João > Fernandes > Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 7:28 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [Reactor For CF] RE: Reactor For CF And now for Sean > > Doug, > > After that, Sean already told that maybe the Record should be the one having > the <cfproperty /> tags because it seems that AS3 > CFC does recognize cf > getters/setters. I'll manualy change a Record Object and I'll test it with > Flex2. > > João Fernandes > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Doug Hughes > Sent: Mon 20-Feb-06 10:12 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: Reactor For CF And now for Sean > > I've added cfproperty tags for all of the "This" variables in the TOs. I > *think* thinks will work for what you need, though I honestly don't know. > To use this delete the tos in the /reactor/project folders and regenerate > them. They should look like this now: > > > > <cfcomponent hint="I am the base TO object for the User table. I am > generated. DO NOT EDIT ME (but feel free to delete me)." > > extends="reactor.base.abstractTo" > > > > > <cfproperty name="userId" type="numeric" /> > > <cfproperty name="username" type="string" /> > > <cfproperty name="password" type="string" /> > > <cfproperty name="firstName" type="string" /> > > <cfproperty name="lastName" type="string" /> > > <cfproperty name="dateCreated" type="date" /> > > > > <cfset variables.signature = "2FCCC57EFDD65DFD2586B563B1BA3D5F" /> > > > > <cfset this.userId = "0" /> > > <cfset this.username = "" /> > > <cfset this.password = "" /> > > <cfset this.firstName = "" /> > > <cfset this.lastName = "" /> > > <cfset this.dateCreated = "#Now()#" /> > > > > </cfcomponent> > > > > If I did this right, the cfproperty tag should describe the metadata as you > need. The cfset tags should hold the actual values. I didn't use the > cfproperty's default attribute because it doesn't seem to place nice with > dates. > > > > Doug > > > > _____ > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of João > Fernandes > Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 6:17 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Reactor For CF And now for Sean > > > > > > Well, I have a question Sean, > > I saw your comment over mike's blog saying that cfproperty set the proper > metadata for cfadapter to be able to map the cfc to the AS class. So, if > Reactor TOs whould have > <cfproperty name="columnName" type="columnType" default="someval"> > instead of <cfset this.columname = someval> could we use reactor TOs to map > our AS Classes? > or there is no need since every property will be a simple value and maps > with no problem? > > Do you see any inconvenient? > > Our next big app will be FES2 + Coldfusion Enterprise and I was hoping that > reactor could bring some nice support for the CRUD part.I was expecting the > CFadapter for DataServices but it seems to be delayed for a next > (beta/final) release. > > Is reactor the good choice for this? > > João Fernandes > Secção de Desenvolvimento > Departamento de Informática > > > > > > -- Reactor for ColdFusion Mailing List -- [email protected] -- Archives > at http://www.mail-archive.com/reactor%40doughughes.net/ > > -- Reactor for ColdFusion Mailing List -- [email protected] > -- Archives at http://www.mail-archive.com/reactor%40doughughes.net/ > > > > > > -- Reactor for ColdFusion Mailing List -- [email protected] > -- Archives at http://www.mail-archive.com/reactor%40doughughes.net/ > > > > > > -- Reactor for ColdFusion Mailing List -- [email protected] > -- Archives at http://www.mail-archive.com/reactor%40doughughes.net/ > > > > > > -- Reactor for ColdFusion Mailing List -- [email protected] > -- Archives at http://www.mail-archive.com/reactor%40doughughes.net/ > > > -- Reactor for ColdFusion Mailing List -- [email protected] -- Archives at http://www.mail-archive.com/reactor%40doughughes.net/
