[flexcoders] Re: Cairngorm - always event, always command? Part2
Appreciate any clarification on the following - am converting my
previously non -service embedded functions to Cairngorm. Command +
Delegate works by the responder calling result or fauLt in
Command. Responder is added to Service, right? So in my banal example
of add 1 + 1, where does the responder come from that calls result()
in Command?
My typical Delegate would be
public function signon( signonAttempt:LoginVO ):void
{
var call:Object = service.signon(signonAttempt) ;
call.addResponder( responder );
}
Who does the 1+1?. I have got pretty good at learning from example
code - I find it very interesting that all examples of Cairngorm show
a call to the backend - there are no examples of using Cairngorm to
execute any other kind of function e.g. my real need to manipulate a
SO on the local client - which I do embedded but want to keep to a
standard (Cairngorm). As always, TIA,
Mic.
--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Douglas Knudsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
certainly use the pattern for reading from a SO. Your Command should be
clueless if its a SO or RPC call, the Delegate does that job.
Consider the
case where you switch from storage in your SO to say S3 or a big
phat Oracle
DB. You only need change your delegate. You can also have a
Command that
mutates your Model in some way that doesn't need any Delegate or
Responder.
Now, if you just want to add 1 + 1, try Googling on 'AbacusCommand'
hehe!
DK
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 3:55 AM, chigwell23 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks Jim. With the Delegate and Responder stuff, it seems on the
surface that Cairngorm is predisposed to service/backend communication
solutions. Taking the example of a function that at the moment is
reading Shared object data - how would this be Cairngormed? When the
Command code is reached, does one just stay there and run the SO code?
i.e. does one move all the function code into a Command function for
non-service oriented activity? Forget Delegates and Responders?
Really interested in what people think here, as the majority of
Cairngorm examples I have seen, have used Cairngorm events for the
service-oriented stuff, but have regressed to embedded functions for
the rest.
I would really like someone to show me how add 1+ 1 is Cairngormed
being serious here! Thanks in advance,
Mic.
--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com, Jim
Hayes jim@ wrote:
I can't see how you'd benefit from sidestepping the cairngorm event
- command way of working in this case.
If you use a service to get the IP address then it's asynchronous,
and has a few possible outcomes.
I can't see why you wouldn't want to wait for it's got one of those
results or an error event and then deal with the outcome.
Which is where the cairngorm way of doing things is really helpful.
If it's synchronous (like opening a database or prefs file in AIR,
say), then you could maybe skip cairngorm (I do, and get away with it,
mostly).
In which case I can't see the benefit of thinking of (or packaging )
it as a cairngorm command. I'd rather put it somewhere else and know
it was a different thing.
But what I've found most of the time is that if you're going to do a
cairngorm app then it's really worth going with the flow and doing
pretty well everything that way,
even if it does mean writing 3 classes when you could get away with
a local method.
Generally, when I've made short cuts like that it's come back and
bitten me on the arse.
I do still do it when I'm in experimental/creative or lazy mode, but
now I'll try to refactor it into the cairngorm way sooner rather than
later.
Which is sometimes a bit boring, but there you go.
Hope that makes (at least some) sense!
-Original Message-
From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com on
behalf of chigwell23
Sent: Thu 01/05/2008 22:51
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com
Subject: [flexcoders] Cairngorm - always event, always command?
pseudocode:
creationComplete
var ipAddress:String
ipAddress = getUserIP()
function getuserIP():String{
// use Services to go out to ColdFusion which can tell me user IP
return IP
}
But Cairngorm encapsulates actions into commands which are
driven by
an event and a delegate. So how does it handle examples like the one
above? Should I create a getIP event, which is dispatched from
creationComplete, and use the standard command/delegate path. If the
event is not necessary, and it still makes sense to put the action
in a command, how would that command get activated without the
Cairngorm event process? I know what I mean grin. TIA,
Mic.
__
This communication is from Primal Pictures Ltd., a company
registered in England and
RE: [flexcoders] Re: Cairngorm - always event, always command? Part2
just call responder.result or reponder.fault directly from your delegate :
so lets say you need to sum 2 integers ( 1+ 1), and for your remote version you
have a call to do that, say it's sum(int1:int, int2:int)
you remote delegate would have a method looking rather like this :
(assume integerPairVo is just a data VO holding the properties int1 and int2)
public function sum( integerPairVo:IntegerPairVo):void
{
var call:Object = service.sum(integerPairVo) ;
call.addResponder( responder );
}
That's easy, the responder is passed to the service, which then calls
responder.result or responder.fault when it gets it's result (or error).
If you want to perform the sum locally (perhaps it's a bad example, more
realistically it would reading a file synchronously, or a shared object
perhaps),
then all you need to do is do the calculation, then call the responders
result method yourself in your delegate, perhaps something like this :
public function sum( integerPairVo:IntegerPairVo):void
{
try
{
var summedIntegers:int = integerPairVo.int1 + integerPairVo.int2; // OK,
this is unlikely to fail, but I hope you get the idea.
responder.result(summedIntegers);
}
catch(error:Error)
{
responder.fault(error.message);
}
}
-Original Message-
From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com on behalf of chigwell23
Sent: Sun 04/05/2008 23:03
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [flexcoders] Re: Cairngorm - always event, always command? Part2
Appreciate any clarification on the following - am converting my
previously non -service embedded functions to Cairngorm. Command +
Delegate works by the responder calling result or fauLt in
Command. Responder is added to Service, right? So in my banal example
of add 1 + 1, where does the responder come from that calls result()
in Command?
My typical Delegate would be
public function signon( signonAttempt:LoginVO ):void
{
var call:Object = service.signon(signonAttempt) ;
call.addResponder( responder );
}
Who does the 1+1?. I have got pretty good at learning from example
code - I find it very interesting that all examples of Cairngorm show
a call to the backend - there are no examples of using Cairngorm to
execute any other kind of function e.g. my real need to manipulate a
SO on the local client - which I do embedded but want to keep to a
standard (Cairngorm). As always, TIA,
Mic.
--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Douglas Knudsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
certainly use the pattern for reading from a SO. Your Command should be
clueless if its a SO or RPC call, the Delegate does that job.
Consider the
case where you switch from storage in your SO to say S3 or a big
phat Oracle
DB. You only need change your delegate. You can also have a
Command that
mutates your Model in some way that doesn't need any Delegate or
Responder.
Now, if you just want to add 1 + 1, try Googling on 'AbacusCommand'
hehe!
DK
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 3:55 AM, chigwell23 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks Jim. With the Delegate and Responder stuff, it seems on the
surface that Cairngorm is predisposed to service/backend communication
solutions. Taking the example of a function that at the moment is
reading Shared object data - how would this be Cairngormed? When the
Command code is reached, does one just stay there and run the SO code?
i.e. does one move all the function code into a Command function for
non-service oriented activity? Forget Delegates and Responders?
Really interested in what people think here, as the majority of
Cairngorm examples I have seen, have used Cairngorm events for the
service-oriented stuff, but have regressed to embedded functions for
the rest.
I would really like someone to show me how add 1+ 1 is Cairngormed
being serious here! Thanks in advance,
Mic.
--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com, Jim
Hayes jim@ wrote:
I can't see how you'd benefit from sidestepping the cairngorm event
- command way of working in this case.
If you use a service to get the IP address then it's asynchronous,
and has a few possible outcomes.
I can't see why you wouldn't want to wait for it's got one of those
results or an error event and then deal with the outcome.
Which is where the cairngorm way of doing things is really helpful.
If it's synchronous (like opening a database or prefs file in AIR,
say), then you could maybe skip cairngorm (I do, and get away with it,
mostly).
In which case I can't see the benefit of thinking of (or packaging )
it as a cairngorm command. I'd rather put it somewhere else and know
it was a different thing.
But what I've found most of the time is that if you're going to do a
cairngorm app then it's really worth going with the flow and doing
pretty well everything that way,
even if it does mean writing 3 classes when you could get away
[flexcoders] Re: Cairngorm - always event, always command? Part2
Thanks Jim. With the Delegate and Responder stuff, it seems on the
surface that Cairngorm is predisposed to service/backend communication
solutions. Taking the example of a function that at the moment is
reading Shared object data - how would this be Cairngormed? When the
Command code is reached, does one just stay there and run the SO code?
i.e. does one move all the function code into a Command function for
non-service oriented activity? Forget Delegates and Responders?
Really interested in what people think here, as the majority of
Cairngorm examples I have seen, have used Cairngorm events for the
service-oriented stuff, but have regressed to embedded functions for
the rest.
I would really like someone to show me how add 1+ 1 is Cairngormed
being serious here! Thanks in advance,
Mic.
--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Jim Hayes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can't see how you'd benefit from sidestepping the cairngorm event
- command way of working in this case.
If you use a service to get the IP address then it's asynchronous,
and has a few possible outcomes.
I can't see why you wouldn't want to wait for it's got one of those
results or an error event and then deal with the outcome.
Which is where the cairngorm way of doing things is really helpful.
If it's synchronous (like opening a database or prefs file in AIR,
say), then you could maybe skip cairngorm (I do, and get away with it,
mostly).
In which case I can't see the benefit of thinking of (or packaging )
it as a cairngorm command. I'd rather put it somewhere else and know
it was a different thing.
But what I've found most of the time is that if you're going to do a
cairngorm app then it's really worth going with the flow and doing
pretty well everything that way,
even if it does mean writing 3 classes when you could get away with
a local method.
Generally, when I've made short cuts like that it's come back and
bitten me on the arse.
I do still do it when I'm in experimental/creative or lazy mode, but
now I'll try to refactor it into the cairngorm way sooner rather than
later.
Which is sometimes a bit boring, but there you go.
Hope that makes (at least some) sense!
-Original Message-
From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com on behalf of chigwell23
Sent: Thu 01/05/2008 22:51
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [flexcoders] Cairngorm - always event, always command?
pseudocode:
creationComplete
var ipAddress:String
ipAddress = getUserIP()
function getuserIP():String{
// use Services to go out to ColdFusion which can tell me user IP
return IP
}
But Cairngorm encapsulates actions into commands which are driven by
an event and a delegate. So how does it handle examples like the one
above? Should I create a getIP event, which is dispatched from
creationComplete, and use the standard command/delegate path. If the
event is not necessary, and it still makes sense to put the action
in a command, how would that command get activated without the
Cairngorm event process? I know what I mean grin. TIA,
Mic.
__
This communication is from Primal Pictures Ltd., a company
registered in England and Wales with registration No. 02622298 and
registered office: 4th Floor, Tennyson House, 159-165 Great Portland
Street, London, W1W 5PA, UK. VAT registration No. 648874577.
This e-mail is confidential and may be privileged. It may be read,
copied and used only by the intended recipient. If you have received
it in error, please contact the sender immediately by return e-mail or
by telephoning +44(0)20 7637 1010. Please then delete the e-mail and
do not disclose its contents to any person.
This email has been scanned for Primal Pictures by the MessageLabs
Email Security System.
__
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Cairngorm - always event, always command? Part2
certainly use the pattern for reading from a SO. Your Command should be
clueless if its a SO or RPC call, the Delegate does that job. Consider the
case where you switch from storage in your SO to say S3 or a big phat Oracle
DB. You only need change your delegate. You can also have a Command that
mutates your Model in some way that doesn't need any Delegate or Responder.
Now, if you just want to add 1 + 1, try Googling on 'AbacusCommand' hehe!
DK
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 3:55 AM, chigwell23 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks Jim. With the Delegate and Responder stuff, it seems on the
surface that Cairngorm is predisposed to service/backend communication
solutions. Taking the example of a function that at the moment is
reading Shared object data - how would this be Cairngormed? When the
Command code is reached, does one just stay there and run the SO code?
i.e. does one move all the function code into a Command function for
non-service oriented activity? Forget Delegates and Responders?
Really interested in what people think here, as the majority of
Cairngorm examples I have seen, have used Cairngorm events for the
service-oriented stuff, but have regressed to embedded functions for
the rest.
I would really like someone to show me how add 1+ 1 is Cairngormed
being serious here! Thanks in advance,
Mic.
--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com, Jim
Hayes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can't see how you'd benefit from sidestepping the cairngorm event
- command way of working in this case.
If you use a service to get the IP address then it's asynchronous,
and has a few possible outcomes.
I can't see why you wouldn't want to wait for it's got one of those
results or an error event and then deal with the outcome.
Which is where the cairngorm way of doing things is really helpful.
If it's synchronous (like opening a database or prefs file in AIR,
say), then you could maybe skip cairngorm (I do, and get away with it,
mostly).
In which case I can't see the benefit of thinking of (or packaging )
it as a cairngorm command. I'd rather put it somewhere else and know
it was a different thing.
But what I've found most of the time is that if you're going to do a
cairngorm app then it's really worth going with the flow and doing
pretty well everything that way,
even if it does mean writing 3 classes when you could get away with
a local method.
Generally, when I've made short cuts like that it's come back and
bitten me on the arse.
I do still do it when I'm in experimental/creative or lazy mode, but
now I'll try to refactor it into the cairngorm way sooner rather than
later.
Which is sometimes a bit boring, but there you go.
Hope that makes (at least some) sense!
-Original Message-
From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com on
behalf of chigwell23
Sent: Thu 01/05/2008 22:51
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com
Subject: [flexcoders] Cairngorm - always event, always command?
pseudocode:
creationComplete
var ipAddress:String
ipAddress = getUserIP()
function getuserIP():String{
// use Services to go out to ColdFusion which can tell me user IP
return IP
}
But Cairngorm encapsulates actions into commands which are driven by
an event and a delegate. So how does it handle examples like the one
above? Should I create a getIP event, which is dispatched from
creationComplete, and use the standard command/delegate path. If the
event is not necessary, and it still makes sense to put the action
in a command, how would that command get activated without the
Cairngorm event process? I know what I mean grin. TIA,
Mic.
__
This communication is from Primal Pictures Ltd., a company
registered in England and Wales with registration No. 02622298 and
registered office: 4th Floor, Tennyson House, 159-165 Great Portland
Street, London, W1W 5PA, UK. VAT registration No. 648874577.
This e-mail is confidential and may be privileged. It may be read,
copied and used only by the intended recipient. If you have received
it in error, please contact the sender immediately by return e-mail or
by telephoning +44(0)20 7637 1010. Please then delete the e-mail and
do not disclose its contents to any person.
This email has been scanned for Primal Pictures by the MessageLabs
Email Security System.
__
--
Douglas Knudsen
http://www.cubicleman.com
this is my signature, like it?
