On top of the Reactor created objects, I’d put a service layer (ProductService, UserService, etc.). Make the public functions in that the definitive model API (the interface to the API that should be used by both Flex and Fusebox) and it’ll speak to the Reactor DAOs and Gateways. Then you may need to add a thin façade for flex as I believe it needs the data presented in a specific way which may be different from the way your fusebox app would consume the data. I personally like the idea of a remote façade as you can put it under the wwwroot directory (e.g. /myproject/wwwroot/remote/ProductFacade.cfc) and keep all of your model safely tucked away somewhere that isn’t web accessible (e.g. /myproject/com/model/ProductService.cfc). There again, I put my DAO, Service and business object into same directory and make all DAO methods protected so they’re only accessible to the service. If you’re using Reactor you could do that (implementing all of the classes you wanted using custom classes that are protected) but I don’t think it would be worth the trouble, so I guess you could put your ProductService.cfc under the web root although I still think the data formatting suggests a remote façade would make sense.
On 9/14/06 11:14 AM, "Marc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
here's a more concrete question...
I have a project that involves a very involved backend business application, which will be built using Flex2/Builder. The persistence will be handled by reactor and SQL 2000.
The website for this same company will need to use data from this same database, but this frontend public website will exist as a fusebox 5 application, and may need the some of the same assets and certainly all of the object cfcs created by reactor as well.
So in Eclipse, I anticipate having two actual projects - the Flex application, and the website. Both of which need to share the same model/objects.
Given this scenario, how should I lay out my application? Flex will be calling web services from a web application, and fusebox will be using the same CFCs as the model. But flex will not be calling the web services via the fusebox app, correct? Instead, flex will call the cfc's directly?
Does anyone else here have a similar situation, or has worked on a similar situaiton in the past?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Teddy Payne
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 10:49 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Reactor for CF] CF7/fusebox5/reactor/flex2
Peter,
You are right. I was not trying to be overly specific on a general question.
Marc,
Well, I would recommend learning how to use the Master/Detail in Flex Builder. The wizard creates a directory structure that will give you some insight.
I have not tried to link Reactor into Flex as yet.
You have to choose what is right for you. Flex vs. Fusebox. Fusebox is more of a procedural programming style where Flex is more event driven, which would be more akin to Model-Glue or Mach-II.
There are advantages with having a SWF over HTML rendering. You know the SWF will look homogenous on browsers that support the Flash Player plugin.
I believe there are pros and cons for both and solutions are viable in each.
Whatever framework you choose, you need to learn the lingua franca and always depend on your CF knowledge to try and keep things as maintainable as possible.
Teddy
On 9/14/06, Marc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
so should I not try using fusebox if I am using 100% flex - and instead just call my CFCs directly as web services? What if later i also need to build a "regular" html site using those same cfcs?
Aside from the wrapper that delivers the swf file to the user's browser, what would the application directory structure look like for a 100% flex-based app wth a coldfusoin/reactor backend, WITHOUT fusebox?
The more I learn, the more confused I get... framework overload!
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Teddy Payne
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 9:53 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Reactor for CF] CF7/fusebox5/reactor/flex2
Fusebox is an HTML framework.
Flex is primarily a Flash framework.
The MXML in Flex references the model, which is typically remote objects (CFC, WebServices, XML) and defines the view, so it is an MVC onto itself.
Reactor is essence is the model.
Teddy
On 9/14/06, Marc <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
A more general question on the use of multiple frameworks at the different
application tiers... The amount of career development going on with me is
beyond words... ;)
I am a newbie to reactor, and also to flex2. I'm curious to know if others
are using FUSEBOX with reactor AND flex2, or if the use of flex2 makes
fusebox kinda unnecessary. What is the best use/layering of these
frameworks? Does flex become the controller and the view, thereby
eliminating the need for the MVC architecture of fusebox? Is reactor simply
the model behind the entire flex application?
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
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/
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
