Comments on: Flex Part 02+: A Better Model Object http://blog.tsclausing.com/post/24 Personal & Professional Blog of T. Scot Clausing // Adobe Flex Consultant in Nashville, TN Sun, 01 Aug 2010 05:21:35 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: T. Scot Clausing http://blog.tsclausing.com/post/24#comment-253 T. Scot Clausing Wed, 17 Dec 2008 14:47:50 +0000 http://blog.tsclausing.com/post/24#comment-253 Sure. And in most cases that is probably the quickest way to get up and running and may be entirely sufficient for your project. I just like to keep the VO's as light as possible for remoting. <strong>Value Object:</strong> Represents only the data (values) that are persisted or retrieved. <strong>Model Object:</strong> Enforces business rules through accessor methods, handles copying and comparing custom object equality, and may contain convenience methods for various tasks (like a getter for "fullName" that returns a concatenated first and last name). There's no right or wrong way to do it - just personal preference. Sure. And in most cases that is probably the quickest way to get up and running and may be entirely sufficient for your project. I just like to keep the VO’s as light as possible for remoting.

Value Object: Represents only the data (values) that are persisted or retrieved.

Model Object: Enforces business rules through accessor methods, handles copying and comparing custom object equality, and may contain convenience methods for various tasks (like a getter for “fullName” that returns a concatenated first and last name).

There’s no right or wrong way to do it - just personal preference.

]]> By: prashanth http://blog.tsclausing.com/post/24#comment-249 prashanth Tue, 16 Dec 2008 17:51:52 +0000 http://blog.tsclausing.com/post/24#comment-249 Hi, Can't the Model Object and Value Object be the same Object? We can define say the phone accessor in VO as well. Is there a reasoning to use VO and convert it to Model object? Hi,
Can’t the Model Object and Value Object be the same Object? We can define say the phone accessor in VO as well. Is there a reasoning to use VO and convert it to Model object?

]]> By: Gordon http://blog.tsclausing.com/post/24#comment-190 Gordon Sun, 02 Nov 2008 11:13:59 +0000 http://blog.tsclausing.com/post/24#comment-190 Hi. I think I follow the logic of this "better" method. And your example at http://blog.tsclausing.com/post/9 was really, really, really useful to me as a flex noobie. However, I don't quite see how this "better" way of doing models would work in actual code. Maybe it is that I am still fuzzy on setters and getters. Can you provide an example of the model locator code where you use the SimpleSchool model instead of the School model? Just something that shows the setters and getters working and value object properties emerging in the code. Everything else has been great in this series. Reading your first example of Value Objects and the table row analogy was a total "Aha" moment for me. Keep up the good work. Hi.

I think I follow the logic of this “better” method. And your example at
http://blog.tsclausing.com/post/9 was really, really, really useful to me as a flex noobie. However, I don’t quite see how this “better” way of doing models would work in actual code. Maybe it is that I am still fuzzy on setters and getters. Can you provide an example of the model locator code where you use the SimpleSchool model instead of the School model? Just something that shows the setters and getters working and value object properties emerging in the code.

Everything else has been great in this series. Reading your first example of Value Objects and the table row analogy was a total “Aha” moment for me. Keep up the good work.

]]> By: Derek Basch http://blog.tsclausing.com/post/24#comment-138 Derek Basch Tue, 22 Apr 2008 18:14:27 +0000 http://blog.tsclausing.com/post/24#comment-138 I was bugged by the inability to enumerate static Value Objects too. I found a good solution here: http://www.lynchconsulting.com.au/blog/index.cfm/2008/2/6/AS3--Looping-over-properties-of-a-class flash.util.describeType() returns an XML Object with static members and can be nicely enumerated. I was bugged by the inability to enumerate static Value Objects too. I found a good solution here:

http://www.lynchconsulting.com.au/blog/index.cfm/2008/2/6/AS3–Looping-over-properties-of-a-class

flash.util.describeType() returns an XML Object with static members and can be nicely enumerated.

]]> By: T. Scot Clausing http://blog.tsclausing.com/post/24#comment-113 T. Scot Clausing Mon, 24 Mar 2008 01:50:43 +0000 http://blog.tsclausing.com/post/24#comment-113 Yes. I actually have updated code for this post. I'll post it as soon as I can - (on vacation for a couple days). Yes. I actually have updated code for this post. I’ll post it as soon as I can - (on vacation for a couple days).

]]> By: dsissoko http://blog.tsclausing.com/post/24#comment-112 dsissoko Sun, 23 Mar 2008 21:48:46 +0000 http://blog.tsclausing.com/post/24#comment-112 Thanks thor this post. i'm interested in the solution for the issue about RemoteClass meta data usage. Can you post some sample code for the toVO and fromVO methods ? Thanks thor this post.
i’m interested in the solution for the issue about RemoteClass meta data usage.
Can you post some sample code for the toVO and fromVO methods ?

]]> By: T. Scot Clausing http://blog.tsclausing.com/post/24#comment-35 T. Scot Clausing Sat, 23 Feb 2008 19:58:43 +0000 http://blog.tsclausing.com/post/24#comment-35 <strong>Note:</strong> If your Value Objects use <code>RemoteClass</code> meta data (to map to a server side VO), the <code>toVO()</code> method may simply return the result of <code>ObjectUtil.copy(_vo)</code>. However, the <code>fromVO()</code> implementation will need to change. <code>fromVO()</code> needs an array of property names which can be either obtained with <code>ObjectUtil.getClassInfo(vo).properties</code> OR you will need to declare a private static array in the Model Object which holds an array of the VO's property names. The <code>fromVO()</code> method will loop through the values in the array instead of using <code>ObjectUtil.copy()</code> implementation shown above. When using meta data to map to a server side object, <code>ObjectUtil.copy()</code> returns a normal class instance instead of a dynamic <code>Object</code> class instance. Only dynamically added properties can be looped through in the way shown above. If you would like to see an example, let me know! I still very much favor this solution. Note:
If your Value Objects use RemoteClass meta data (to map to a server side VO), the toVO() method may simply return the result of ObjectUtil.copy(_vo). However, the fromVO() implementation will need to change.

fromVO() needs an array of property names which can be either obtained with ObjectUtil.getClassInfo(vo).properties OR you will need to declare a private static array in the Model Object which holds an array of the VO’s property names. The fromVO() method will loop through the values in the array instead of using ObjectUtil.copy() implementation shown above.

When using meta data to map to a server side object, ObjectUtil.copy() returns a normal class instance instead of a dynamic Object class instance. Only dynamically added properties can be looped through in the way shown above. If you would like to see an example, let me know! I still very much favor this solution.

]]>