Not to sound facetious but the OP asked the question after I gave my 
recommendation to use modules so I thought I would give him the details on how 
I learned.

Anyway, my personal cost/benefit analysis on all the frameworks persuaded me to 
just not use any of them. The time to learn them outweighed any benefit I could 
foresee. We on-boarded a new developer that learned both Flex and our code 
architecture and had written and deployed a new non-trivial module within two 
months including back end PHP code with WebORB.


--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Richard Rodseth <rrods...@...> wrote:
>
> I think the discussion of modules is only relevant in so far as some
> frameworks (Cairngorm?) won't work well with them if they make use of
> singletons.
> Any reasonable-sized single-module app (a pretty large proportion of Flex
> apps, I'd wager) benefits from a good MVC architecture.
> 
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:31 AM, valdhor <valdhorli...@...>wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > I actually read the documentation around five or six times until I was sure
> > I understood it and then used places like Alex's blog (
> > http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui/2007/03/modules.html) to fill in any gaps.
> > The biggest hurdle I had was in understanding how to use interfaces so that
> > the main app (Which holds the menubar etc) and each of the modules could
> > exchange data. Once you figure it out, you will never go back.
> >
> >
> > --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com <flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>, Jake
> > Churchill <reynacho@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I have never written an app using modules. I understand the logic behind
> > > it, I've just never had the need. Is there anything regarding modules
> > that
> > > I should know before starting?
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:27 AM, valdhor <valdhorlists@>wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I have an extremely large enterprise application (24 modules and
> > counting)
> > > > that does not use any framework. If you can discipline yourself in the
> > way
> > > > you organize your code, I don't really see the need for a framework. It
> > just
> > > > adds complexity in my view.
> > > >
> > > > I would recommend starting with modules if you see the need may be
> > coming
> > > > later on. I started with a monolithic app while I was learning Flex and
> > had
> > > > to change over to modules six months in. That was no fun I can tell
> > you. Now
> > > > that each part is in a module it makes it much easier for other team
> > members
> > > > to modify the code. It is also a lot easier to follow the logic. I
> > would
> > > > also recommend a versioning system - we use Subversion.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com 
> > > > <flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com><flexcoders%
> > 40yahoogroups.com>, Jake
> >
> > > > Churchill <reynacho@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I have been tasked with architecting a large application for a
> > company a
> > > > > friend of mine works at. I will also do some of the coding and act as
> > a
> > > > > mentor, teaching people on staff the ins and outs of Flex.
> > > > >
> > > > > In the past, I've always used Cairngorm and Cairngorm w/ UM
> > Extensions
> > > > for a
> > > > > framework. I wrote a very basic app w/ Mate once just to learn it and
> > I
> > > > > didn't really like it. So, my question to everyone here is what
> > Framework
> > > > > would you chose? Keep in mind, the people I'll be working with are
> > > > > relatively new to flex and the application is going to end up being
> > quite
> > > > > large. Down the road it will likely have an AIR counterpart. We might
> > use
> > > > > modules but for now I'm staying away from that because it adds
> > another
> > > > layer
> > > > > of complexity that in the initial stages is not needed.
> > > > >
> > > > > My thoughts on this are that Cairngorm would be easier to learn for
> > them
> > > > and
> > > > > they had talked about brining more people on in the future for this
> > > > > project. If that's the case, it would likely be easier to find people
> > > > > familiar with Cairngorm than some of the alternatives. But, I don't
> > want
> > > > to
> > > > > rule out any of the alternatives if they might actually be a better
> > > > choice.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Opinions please.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks!
> > > > >
> > > > > -Jake Churchill
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >  
> >
>


Reply via email to