I was thinking about PureMVC in terms of Cairngorm. Just trying to understand one framework by comparing it to another.

Is it correct to think about PureMVC's Model object that is hidden behind the Application Facade as being similar to Cairngorm's Model Locator pattern? Just in the sense that it is the one place to attach references to all of your models/proxies and access them in a convenient and consistent manner.

Woohoo!

I think this will make it a lot easier for newbies (myself included), to get up to speed with the framework. I know that this was one area that caused a little friction when I was first getting started.

And it'll remove one layer of boiler plate code that I didn't enjoy having to write, but it was well worth the convenience to do so at the time.

Nice work!

Hi All,

It appears that the way Proxy classes are set up they pretty much behave like Singletons. Due to the idiom where you define a NAME constant inside of the Proxy class and retrieve the instance of the Proxy via that NAME constant:

public static const NAME:String = 'CodePeekDataProxy';

I was just curious about the intent of this design. I have tried to see if there were cases were I would use multiple instances of a single Proxy class in my own applications and I can't think of any. So this idiom makes total sense to me, but I just wanted some clarification or insight into this to make sure I was using it properly.

What would happen if you instantiate 2 Proxies of the same class? Would you only be able to retrieve the first instance using facade.retrieveProxy()? Is it a rare case that you actually need multiple instances of the same Proxy class?

Thanks,
Carl

That was the first thing that I thought when I started using the framework. I felt it was kind of tedious to have to use the boilerplate Abstract classes, but since there were only 2 of them I didn't mind so much.

I'm not certain, but it appears that the reason why it isn't part of the framework is due to the coupling to the ApplicationFacade.

If there were some nice way for Cliff to make the Abstract classes part of the framework I think it would make an already elegant and powerful framework even more so.