Futurescale, Inc. PureMVC Home

The PureMVC Framework Code at the Speed of Thought


Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2017, 02:38:54 PM
Home Help Search Login Register
News: ATTENTION: Spambots must die! Humans must visit http://contact.futurescale.com to request forum access.
Pages: [1]
Print
Author Topic: Multicore -> Pipes -> 'Submodules'  (Read 3464 times)
openoli
Full Member
***
Posts: 42


View Profile
« on: February 14, 2013, 02:54:24 AM »

Hi,
after switching to Multicore and adding the PipesUtility by implementing the ideas of the PipeWorks demo
there remain some questions regarding 'submodules'.
I've read a lot in this forum regarding this issue but at least I don't understand it.

Imagine we'd like to extend the the PrattlerModule (from the PipeWorks demo) with more features.
For instance there is a navigation tree with some items that offers some more complex functions (in prattler context).
To be encapsulated we would like to build an own core for each function.
So here a function is something like a 'submodule' but of course each submodule should be independent and self-contained.

How we could solve this by using pipes?

Is this a appropriate way:
A PrattlerSkeletonModule implements the 'main' module frame including the navigation.
A PrattlerModuleX implements the current PrattlerModule features as 'submodule'.
A PrattlerModuleY implements new Prattler feature(s) as 'submodule'.
A PrattlerModuleZ implements more new Prattler feature(s) as 'submodule'.
...

By requesting the Prattler from the shell, the PrattlerSkeletonModule is delivered.
After this the PrattlerSkeletonModule request the default module, e.g. PrattlerModuleX from the shell and displays it.
By clickling a navigation item inside the PrattlerSkeletonModule the suitable module is requested by the PrattlerSkeletonModule and the shell will deliver this to the PrattlerSkeletonModule to display it.
(Or should the PrattlerSkeletonModule deliver the requested module directly, without involving the shell? )
Each Module(core in this case) is connected by own pipes from the shell to itself and vice versa.

Would it basically a good idea that some cores are connected directly with each other without involving the shell?

Thanks for help!

Olaf


 
« Last Edit: February 14, 2013, 04:12:41 AM by openoli » Logged
puremvc
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2860



View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: February 14, 2013, 08:12:52 AM »

Quote
Imagine we'd like to extend the the PrattlerModule (from the PipeWorks demo) with more features.
For instance there is a navigation tree with some items that offers some more complex functions (in prattler context).
To be encapsulated we would like to build an own core for each function.
So here a function is something like a 'submodule' but of course each submodule should be independent and self-contained.

How we could solve this by using pipes?


I'm not fully sure I understand the question. Yes, you could extend a module and extend the classes used in that module. That's not pipes, that's just normal OOP. I don't fully understand each 'function' being a core, though. A core usually provides a number of related functions. You could separate every function to a core of its own, but that would mean an untenable amount of coding overhead for each function. You have to ask yourself why you're doing the separation and what the real, tangible benefit of that separation is first.

Quote
Would it basically a good idea that some cores are connected directly with each other without involving the shell?

You certainly can plumb cores together without them having to be plumbed to the shell. Have a look at this slide in the MultiCore Overview Presentation:
http://puremvc.tv/#P002/T235

-=Cliff>


Logged
openoli
Full Member
***
Posts: 42


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: February 15, 2013, 01:44:56 AM »

Hi Cliff,
sorry for the confusing question, maybe I'm confused by myself Wink
I should think about my formulations before posting.
Seems that I've not understand the pipes concept completely.

Of course I don't want to separate every function to a core of its own.

The question was regarding the arrangement of modules and if it's a appropriate way to place 'submodules'
inside a 'mainmodule' and if all these modules could talk to each other without involving the shell.
Perhaps the differentiation in 'main-/submodules' is completely rubbish, I should think about it!

But sometimes I tend to think too much about whether the things the 'right' are.
Instead of thinking and asking too much I should just implement my ideas to see if it works and dispel doubts ;-)

Quote
You certainly can plumb cores together without them having to be plumbed to the shell. Have a look at this slide in the MultiCore Overview Presentation:
http://puremvc.tv/#P002/T235
Yes, that's it... don't know why I don't registered this slide before.

Now I'll try to install my pipes to get the cores connected;-)

Thanks for help!
Olaf
« Last Edit: February 15, 2013, 02:00:07 AM by openoli » Logged
Pages: [1]
Print
Jump to: