Hi João,
To me it's not completely clear in what youre trying to accomplish (apart from code reusability). What's the real problem you're dealing with? To me it sounds your biggest problem is the actual view management and the flexibility in moving views. Which I believe is the problem everyone is dealing with! ARP and Cairngorm do not give me the view management Im looking for! To me they are only good for data separation / business logic. There is always a bunch of things that need to be changed when switching views (and preferably in a specific order). To me a notification from the model is not sufficient enough. I must admit, I haven't looked at PureMVC yet (to me it looks quite complex to get a grip on). But whenever I'm dealing with complex views (and sequences) there is only one thing out there that supports my needs and that's the Gugga task principle. The basis of Guggas taskmanagement is the ITask interface, which is as easy as 123! Modeled after that simple interface we have all kinds of predefined tasks, but the most important ones are TaskManager and TaskSequence. Check out the diagrams on the Gugga blog and see if this is the complexity youre trying to manage within youre views: <http://www.gugga.com/flashblog/2006/10/basics-of-tasks-and-sequences-in_20. html> http://www.gugga.com/flashblog/2006/10/basics-of-tasks-and-sequences-in_20.h tml And download the examples here: <http://www.gugga.com/GuggaFlashFramework/> http://www.gugga.com/GuggaFlashFramework/ I promise, once you get a real grip on it, you dont want to look back on what you were doing before. Yours, Sander _____ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of João Saleiro Sent: woensdag 7 mei 2008 18:52 To: Open Source Flash Mailing List Subject: [osflash] Architecture of reusable modules with different view perproject Hello, I am starting now with PureMVC. I was a Cairngorm adept (and before that, ARP), but Cairngorm failed me when I started working more and more with Modules. I studied PureMVC with the multicore examples, and both the architecture and workflow convinced me. I am not 100% comfortable with PureMVC yet, but I'm already testing it on a real project. I am trying to improve code reusability, and I need some advices to achieve a best-practices solution to the problem I'll describe below. This might be a common problem when someone starts building larger projects, while reusing code, and maintaining the smallest dependencies possible between modules. I'll try to explain with an example. We have organized our workflow for reusing code between projects the following way: - we have a folder where we put everything that's needed among several projects (our library); - in each project we add the library to the classpath of the project. For example, about 90% of our projects need a custom "LocaleManager " module. A LocaleManager is something composed with a view, a model and a controller, that allows users to add new languages to our RIAs. The functionality is 100% equal in every application. So we decided to create a Module that resides on our library path, and the Module has it's own MVC architecture based on PureMVC multicore. The thing is that while the functionality is 100% the same in every application, the view might change. Not only in terms of (css) style, but also in terms of what and how things are shown to the user. So I thought in removing the View from the MVC of the Module, putting it on the Main application, and when I load the Module I would inject the view. I created an IViewReceiver that my Module implements, with a function inject(mediator:IMediator, addView:Boolean):void . The implementation of this function would consist on registering the mediator on the facade of the Module, and making and addChild of the mediator.getViewComponent() if the addView flag equals true. If my module has more than one component, I have to call the inject method for each component I want to register with the Module' Facade. I am implementing this right now, but I'm not sure if it's the best option, and even if it works. I wonder if there is a established best-practice out there for this case. Do you think that my solution will work? Is there a better one? Summarizing, what I need is to have modules in a library shared between projects; Each module is almost a full application, without the view (it can have the view coded on the same packaged, but it's not included by default) so it's a MVC without the V; The guy who creates the Application that uses the module must have the possibility to create it's own view for that module; The modules must be independent of the applications where they are used, but the applications can be dependent on the modules. Thank you, João Saleiro -- João Saleiro Email/MSN: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Skype: joao.saleiro Tel: +351 916 077 097 / +351 968 203 370 WWW: <http://www.webfuel.pt> http://www.webfuel.pt
<<logo.gif>>
_______________________________________________ osflash mailing list [email protected] http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
