Futurescale, Inc. PureMVC Home

The PureMVC Framework Code at the Speed of Thought


Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 24, 2017, 08:21:48 PM
Home Help Search Login Register
News: ATTENTION: Spambots must die! Humans must visit http://contact.futurescale.com to request forum access.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
 11 
 on: March 20, 2017, 01:48:23 PM 
Started by piotrzarzycki - Last post by piotrzarzycki
Hi Cliff,

My names is Piotr Zarzycki and I am one of the PMC member of Apache Flex project. With the Team we are working on next generation Flex framework FlexJS. [1] One of our users Prashant created interesting demo when he was able to use MultiCore version of PureMVC to build application. He basically creates from sources of MultiCore PureMVC swc using FlexJS compiler. [2] (swc is in bin folder)

I like his demo cause it's simply showing that we are able to use PureMVC to build FlexJS applications. I would like to put this demo in our examples - make it available for each user who would like to use FlexJS.

We are building our examples and framework itself using Ant or Maven. I would like to prepare Prashant's demo to be buildable by Maven and make FlexJS version of PureMVC downloadable from Maven central.

- Would it be possible to put our FlexJS version of PureMVC.swc in maven central ?

[1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLEX/FlexJS
[2] https://www.dropbox.com/s/2h2cdfyje5lojlh/PureMVC.zip

Thank you in advance,
Piotr

 12 
 on: December 28, 2016, 07:24:07 AM 
Started by puremvc - Last post by puremvc
That would be really cool.

 13 
 on: December 23, 2016, 12:03:54 PM 
Started by puremvc - Last post by saad
Hi Cliff,

Just saw this now, I would love to setup a demo for Pipes, something like Prattler demo.

The idea is to create additional framework libraries within the XCode project serving as modules, each one having it's own storyboard, viewComponents, commands, proxies and delegate objects. The viewComponents will then be piped to shell on requests etc. where they would be added to the hierarchy (remove etc.). The visual component management and layout within XCode has changed a lot recently, hopefully the recent changes will be final.

StateMachine is simpler, a demo similar to StopWatch should suffice. Will try to get on them soon.

 14 
 on: December 11, 2016, 11:00:16 AM 
Started by puremvc - Last post by puremvc
Thanks a ton to Saad Shams for taking time from his busy schedule to bring the port up to date.

 15 
 on: December 11, 2016, 10:59:36 AM 
Started by puremvc - Last post by puremvc
Thanks a ton to Saad Shams for taking time from his busy schedule to bring the port up to date.

 16 
 on: August 30, 2016, 11:03:16 AM 
Started by openoli - Last post by puremvc
Thats the ticket.  Smiley

 17 
 on: August 29, 2016, 07:31:05 AM 
Started by openoli - Last post by openoli
Hi Cliff,
I've already outsourced my model for a long time but it never occurs to me to just introduce a static class var inside the proxy.
So, many thanks again for your support!

Cause this is probably a common use case I'd like to share the code:
Code:
public class LoginProxy extends Proxy
{
public static const NAME:String = "LoginProxy";

        // This could also be a VO of course
protected static var sharedAuthToken:String;

public function LoginProxy(proxyName:String=null, data:LoginVO=null) {
super(proxyName, data);
}

protected function setAuthToken(value:String):void {
LoginProxy.sharedAuthToken = value;
}

public function get authToken():String{
return LoginProxy.sharedAuthToken;
}
      
        ...
}

Thanks,
Olaf

 18 
 on: August 27, 2016, 07:19:23 AM 
Started by openoli - Last post by puremvc
If you package your model in a separate library, then each core can use it. You could make the LoginProxy have a class property that holds the ProfileVO. That would let you register it in every core, retrieve it, and be able to access the login info that was fetched by the instance in the shell. Make it 'protected static' and add a getter for it.

Cheers,
-=Cliff>

 19 
 on: August 25, 2016, 12:36:39 PM 
Started by openoli - Last post by openoli
Hi,
this might be also already discussed in the past so sorry for asking again ;-)

In a lot of cases it's necessary to share e.g. login information across all cores.
I wonder if it's better to share a LoginProxy instance that resides in the shell or if it's better to share the LoginProxy class,
let each core create its own instance and just inject the LoginProxy data to the new instance.

[1] Share instance:
// Retrieve login proxy from shell and access login data directly
var shell:IFacade = Facade.getInstance(SharedConstants.SHELL);
var loginProxy:LoginProxy= shell.retrieveProxy(LoginProxy.NAME) as LoginProxy;
Code:
// Retrieve login proxy from shell and access login data directly
var shell:IFacade = Facade.getInstance(SharedConstants.SHELL);
var loginProxy:IProxy= shell.retrieveProxy(SharedConstants.LOGIN_PROXY) as IProxy;
var loginVO:LoginVO = loginProxy.getData() as LoginVO;


[2] Share class:
Code:
// Retrieve login proxy from shell, register new login proxy instance within this core and inject loginVO
var shell:IFacade = Facade.getInstance(SharedConstants.SHELL);
var loginProxy:LoginProxy = new LoginProxy(LoginProxy.NAME, shell.retrieveProxy(LoginProxy.NAME).getData() as LoginVO)
facade.registerProxy(loginProxy);
var loginVO:LoginVO = loginProxy.getData() as LoginVO;

Or would it be generally a bad idea to retrieve the shell from another core doing it this way?

Thanks in advance,
Olaf


 20 
 on: August 21, 2016, 09:59:50 AM 
Started by openoli - Last post by openoli
Thanks Cliff, l'll go that way!

Olaf

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10