I never really thought about it, but now that I think about it, I imagine that typing an object will provide tremendous performance gains as Flex works its data binding. If the values are typed then the JIT knows where to look to set the value. Other wise it would be searching it as a generic object.
Alan On 5/26/09 10:55 PM, "Jake Churchill" <j...@cfwebtools.com> wrote: > > > > > > I think it¹s more for the code hints than anything J > > > Jake Churchill > CF Webtools > 11204 Davenport, Ste. 100 > Omaha, NE 68154 > http://www.cfwebtools.com > 402-408-3733 x103 > > > From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:flexcod...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf > Of Tim Rowe > Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2009 5:59 PM > To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [flexcoders] Value Objects > > > > > > > The use of 'VO's in Flex has always confused me, largely because as everyone > I've spoken to has explained it, all a 'Value' object is is just a Model > object - therefore WTF are they being referred to as 'VO's when 'Object' (or > Model object) would suffice. My understanding is that the Object > representation's deep structure references objects ByRef, but Transfer Objects > reference nonserializable/non-native objects by id. That is, if you have Dog > { id:int; parent:Dog; } the TO becomes DogTO {id:int; parentID:int;} > > I'm still yet to have anyone explain it to me in a way which contradicts this > way of looking at things. > > --Tim > > > > From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:flexcod...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf > Of Nate Beck > Sent: Wednesday, 27 May 2009 7:53 AM > To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Value Objects > > Hey Mike, > > > > You'll see VO and DTO used interchangeably, I believe this is because > Cairngorm used to use Data Transfer Object and then switched to Value Objects > at some point. > > > > That being said... this article gives a very basic example of passing data to > and from a server strictly typed, which is what you are trying to accomplish. > > > > http://flex.sys-con.com/node/505875 ( ick syscon... anyone know where the real > article is? ) > > > > The key is the using the [RemoteClass(alias="java.package.Class")], so that > when Flex serializes and de-serializes the object, it knows what corresponding > class on the server your object represents. > > > > I seem to recall that when creating VOs (or DTOs) with a ColdFusion service, > you needed to add extra methods to assist in the serialization. > > > > Maybe someone else add to this? I've been out of CF for a while now. > > On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 2:42 PM, mikeashields <mikeashie...@hotmail.com> > wrote: > > > I've come via a MySql to CF to Flex learning path. > > As such, 1.) my flex app uses <mx:RemoteObject> with source= pointing at a CFC > (in wwwroot/test/cfcs directory). > > 2.) Said cfc calls a MySql STORED PROCEDURE which returns (say) a list of > "owners" (id, firstname, lastname, etc). > > 3.) CF passes this back to Flex (apparently in the form of an Object?). > > 4.) Flex then binds this returned data to a <mx:DataGrid>. > > Now I've read extensively on VOs (as well as Cairngorm/MVC) yet don't fully > understand either the "why" or the "how". > > Assuming as basic an example as possible, I need to use AS3 to first define > then instantiate an ownerVO, then a function to populate the ownerVO with the > results of the RemoteObject then I populate the DataGrid with ownerVOs???? > > Comments and/or directions to appropriate learning resources appreciated. > > >
