> What if you have a class that is both a vo and a part of the model (the
> situation I mentioned in my original post)?
> Should you clone the vo and put it in the model, as Claudiu mentioned?
What do you mean by "part of the model"; it is used by the model?
If so, why does that matter? VO's should be in the "vo" package, nowhere else.
> I followed the structure used by David Tucker
Well, Cairngorm has a few things backwards (IMO), like CairngormEvent and
CairngormEventDispatcher both being in the "control"
package.
Both should be in an "events" package, just like the standard Flex Event and
EventDispatcher classes are.
flash.events.Event
flash.events.EventDispatcher
And their use of "ModelLocator" is just... eeew. It's not a "locator", it's
just a Model.
My guess is they looked at ARP a bit too much, but missed the point of how it
is actually used :)
regards,
Muzak
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jorge Maiquez" <jmaiq...@yahoo.com>
To: <flexcoders@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 6:31 PM
Subject: RE: [flexcoders] cairngorm convention: vo or model?
@Claudiu
> in you model? It won't even be in you project structure. it will
> be from your libs where the swc's reside... You can clone vo's
> into model classes but it seems such a waste to me ...
Point taken.
@Jake
> commands are in commands, vo’s should all be in vo
So by that token, models should be in models, right? What if you have a class
that is both a vo and a part of the model (the
situation I mentioned in my original post)? Should you clone the vo and put it
in the model, as Claudiu mentioned?
> default Cairngorm structure has commands and events at the same
> level as control, not inside of control
I followed the structure used by David Tucker:
http://www.davidtucker.net/2007/10/29/cairngorm-part-3/
