Over 10 years of community discussion and knowledge are maintained here as a read-only archive. New discussions should be taken up in issues on the appropriate projects at https://github.com/PureMVC
|
|
|
Show Posts
|
Pages: 1 [2]
|
16
|
PureMVC Manifold / Demos and Utils / Re: Slacker - A PureMVC AS3 / Flex Demo
|
on: November 30, 2008, 05:39:18
|
Cliff,
What if one of viewstack's view contains several heavy containers that are not managed through a VS (i.e 4 forms fed by big datasources and displayed simultaneously...) VS____V1 l_____V2____C1,C2,C3,C4 l_____V3
Is checking parent view is enough (through creationComplete/checkForMediator) or does I need to add checking for each components ?
Thx for your answer
Eric
|
|
|
18
|
Announcements and General Discussion / General Discussion / Err 1009 after a cast of event.result to my VO object
|
on: November 13, 2008, 09:39:28
|
hello, In a "classical" login module with a class mapped VO (freely stolen from Cliff toturial and answers to Shinan ) , I return the MemberVO object representing the whole profile of user if he is known in db or return false if not. On my LoginProxy class, everything seems ok. I can cast event.result to MemberVO class but the instance I get is null. private function onResultHandler(event:ResultEvent):void{ if (!event.result){ setData(null); }else{ trace("id="+event.result.id+" nickname="+event.result.nickname); //works fine! I get ID and nickname... setData(event.result); var memberVO:MemberVO=event.result as MemberVO; //no complain ! trace("memberVO.id="+memberVO.id) //Error #1009: Cannot access a property or method of a null object.. } sendNotification(LOGIN_RESPONSE,event.result); maybe i missed something Thx for any help.
|
|
|
19
|
Announcements and General Discussion / Getting Started / Erreur d'édition dans la traduction francaise
|
on: April 13, 2008, 07:50:55
|
(This post is to mention a significant error in the french translation of the "Best Practices" document)
Aux lecteurs francophones de la documentation de PureMVC.
Outre quelques erreurs mineures que vous aurez surement relevées, la version actuellement en ligne du document "Meilleures Pratiques" comporte une coquille importante rescapée par la fatigue des nombreuses vérifications et manipulations.
Dans la section "Les Proxys- Encapsuler la logique domaine dans les proxys" (page 42 - dernier paragraphe) au lieu de :
Un changement dans le modèle la vue, ni le contrôleur éventuellement. Un réagencement des parties vue/contrôleur.
il faut lire:
Un changement dans le modèle impliquera souvent un réagencement des parties vue/contrôleur.
Mille excuses à ceux qui se sont empressés d'imprimer le document dès sa mise en ligne.
Par ailleurs, n'étant pas traducteur professionnel, je vous remercie par avance de toute remarque ou suggestion susceptibles d'améliorer cette traduction.
Eric
MISE A JOUR DU 25 avril : la version PDF maintenant en ligne incorpore la correction mentionnée précédemment. Merci Cliff !
|
|
|
20
|
PureMVC Manifold / Demos and Utils / Re: StartupManager - A PureMVC AS3 Utility
|
on: April 01, 2008, 03:45:04
|
Philip,Cliff, To set up a clean app skeleton, I understand that it may be better now to study StartupAsOrdered (that implements StartupManager and AsynchStub) than AppSkeleton. Am I right ? With spotlights on V2, many of us look like blind bats in a dark attic looking for best sample to bite (juicy and bloody one ! ) and as it's much easier to pick into manifold than reading all posts.. Would be great to get a small note on samples getting out of date. Just my point of view...
|
|
|
22
|
Announcements and General Discussion / General Discussion / Re: AppSkeleton + CafeTownsend
|
on: March 04, 2008, 12:26:12
|
Cliff,
I set up this multi app structure: starting from Arch101 sample (admin+user apps) I added a preload app (from AppSkeleton) then changed admin.mxml and user.mxml into Canvas. But starting from preload I still can't properly chain all these parts:I always get an err 1009 as soon as I add to main viewstack, a view from another app.
Considering only Arch101(to be simpler) how would you link admin app to user app (i.e get into admin panels after being logged instead of getting into MainMenu panel that is not an app but just a view of user app..) ?
Thx for your help.
|
|
|
23
|
Announcements and General Discussion / General Discussion / Re: AppSkeleton + CafeTownsend
|
on: March 01, 2008, 09:09:05
|
As I got no answer to my question, let's try a new approach... AppSkeleton seems to be an interesting start but does not considers multi app architecture like Arch101 does : unit3-lab3 manages 2 apps (admin management and user login) with a common model Maybe I better start from Arch101 and try to integrate AppSkeleton functionnalities as a third app ? Adding a view and a controller but integrating model Would appreciate any recommendations
|
|
|
24
|
Announcements and General Discussion / General Discussion / AppSkeleton + CafeTownsend
|
on: February 26, 2008, 07:45:35
|
I"m trying to adapt CafeTownsend login sample into a generic shell (based on Daniele Ugoletti's AppSkeleton)
My app preloads and loads correctly, jumps from a SplashScreen and stops on a MainScreen that now contains a memberLogin view (eq to CafeTownsend EmployeeLogin view)
Unfortunately, when I fill in form and press login button, APP_LOGIN event is never catched by the corresponding mediator.
As mixing structures is complex to figure out, that's pretty hard for me to determine where my bug may come from so I'm stalled.
Considering theses two samples, does an expert can see a trap in mixing them ?
(for example, as MainScreen level does not exist in CT, should MemberLoginMediator be registered into MainScreenMediator rather than in ApplicationMediator ?!)
Thx
|
|
|
28
|
Announcements and General Discussion / General Discussion / folders organization
|
on: November 01, 2007, 09:13:34
|
Hi, Studying the Arch101 sample, I understand that in a multi component app (several Flex mxml file...) there is a unique trio of folders (model/view/controller) wherein we put all related files to each component Though, it would sound more intuitive to keep each comp in a dedicated folder,each one MVC organized. I suppose your approach is better but can figure out why... Thank's for your work, your support...and your answer !
|
|
|
|
|
|