Yea, I just don't buy into that. I am all for short files and clear separation of responsibilities, but I don't see what single-method-delegates buys you. My delegates are pretty dumb, they just contain methods that take params and pass em along to web methods. I don't access the model or anything inside my delegates. To each his own obviously but I just don't think I will ever be sold on that division. I guess I'm a Cairngorm rebel. :)
Ben --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Bjorn Schultheiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hey Ben, > > > The Idea is that even if you are calling the same webservice you are > to create a new delegate. > > The sequence is Event - Command - Delegate. > > Not saying that i follow it, but I'm sure in it's strictest > implementation its 1 to 1. > > > Check this > http://jessewarden.com/2007/08/10-tips-for-working-with-cairngorm.html > 6. There are 3 ways to use Commands & Delegates. I prefer A because > it's consistent, leads to short class files, and is very explicit. > A) For every use case, you make 1 Command and 1 Event. This can > sometimes also mean 1 Delegate. (ie, LoginEvent, LoginCommand, > LoginDelegate) > > > Anyone from AC care to confirm? > > > > On 23/10/2007, at 12:08 PM, ben.clinkinbeard wrote: > > > > the 1 to 1 event-command-delegate methodology > > > > I've heard that mentioned indirectly a couple of times before but > > don't remember ever reading it as a suggested methodology. Maybe I > > just missed that instruction but I don't follow that practice. I have > > one delegate per Web Service, so several Commands end up using the > > same Delegate. > > > > As a general practice, I think Commands are very often an appropriate > > and efficient approach. > > > > I haven't looked into PureMVC yet but would like to at some point. > > That being said, I've also not really encountered any situations where > > I felt Cairngorm was restricting me from accomplishing anything. > > > > Ben > > > > --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Bjorn Schultheiss > > <bjorn.mailinglists@> wrote: > > > > > > Hey All, > > > > > > I don't know if there has been a previous thread on this. I'm > > > assuming there is but i thought i'd start one again in light of some > > > recent blog posts about a Silvafug meeting by the assertTrue guys on > > > frameworks. > > > > > > http://www.asserttrue.com/articles/2007/10/17/silvafug-application- > > > frameworks-presentation > > > http://probertson.com/articles/2007/10/18/flex-application- > > frameworks- > > > presentations/ > > > http://www.sephiroth.it/weblog/archives/2007/10/flex_frameworks.php > > > > > > I haven't used PureMVC yet but I have used Cairngorm for a while > > > (since the flash 7 days). > > > > > > I will say I've got a few beefs with Cairngorm and from just looking > > > at the PureMVC diagram i already see a few solutions. > > > > > > I guess my main beefs with cairngorm has been the use of commands. > > > Specifically in creating Re-usable commands. > > > the 1 to 1 event-command-delegate methodology has never sat well > > with > > > me. > > > > > > Dumb Models (vo collections) is another. > > > > > > Support for unit testing in the View is another. > > > > > > > > > Anyone care to help start a discussion? > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > Bjorn > > > > > > > > > >
