Comments for Dave Keen

Comment on PureMVC Tutorial - Flex, PureMVC, Jabber and XIFF 3: Conclusion, Demo & Downloads by sathish

sathish — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 07:24:05 +0000

give source code shown errors while build. files need supporting files. like ChatEvent .. wat to do?

Comment on PureMVC Tutorial - Flex, PureMVC, Jabber and XIFF 3: Conclusion, Demo & Downloads by kalpesh

kalpesh — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 06:30:21 +0000

it is the best

Comment on Google (XML) Sitemaps Mirror Wordpress Plugin by Salim

Salim — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 17:55:50 +0000

Please write a new hack for the latest one.

Comment on Nike Team Kit Builder by diogobpn

diogobpn — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 17:04:20 +0000

ficou muito bom, mas eu queria ver um programa de voces para eu poder criar umas camisas tambem.

Comment on PureMVC Tutorial - Flex, PureMVC, Jabber and XIFF 3: Conclusion, Demo & Downloads by FlassAri

FlassAri — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:15:48 +0000

Hi Dave,
just wanted to thank you for this insightful tutorial, it really helped me get a grasp of how to develop using PureMVC (just telling me to read the PureMVC pdf’s added a lot).
It took away a lot of the doubts I had of how I would develop my current game project using the framework.

-Ari-

Comment on PureMVC Tutorial - Flex, PureMVC, Jabber and XIFF 3: Conclusion, Demo & Downloads by Ann

Ann — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 15:26:04 +0000

Hi Dave,
This is good. But when I compile and build and when I click testMovie, it load s the swf and when i enter a us/pw and select the .ser option i get the security error, how can i see it working, what url should I give in the IE browser for it to work?
thnaks,
Ann

Comment on Getting FlashDevelop intellisense code hinting to work with Flash CS3 v3 components by matt

matt — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 01:21:09 +0000

For what it’s worth, although the first example SEEMS too complicated to be the right solution, it’s the only way I’ve found to get purely AS3 flashdevelop projects to compile (using flex sdk instead of flash ide) - publish the flash file to a .swc and adding it to the flashdevelop library is really easy enough, all things considered.

Comment on PureMVC Tutorial - Flex, PureMVC, Jabber and XIFF 3: Part 3 - Application and ApplicationFacade by Ann

Ann — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 19:29:14 +0000

Hi Dave,
I followed your instructons to the Application and Applicationfaade step, but after getting the FlashDevelop templates for Application facade etc where do i put them in which folder, I do not see Add new Application facade option in the menu for add, what am I doing wrong?
thanks,
Ann

Comment on Getting the Class of an object in AS3 by scott ackerman

scott ackerman — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 18:23:08 +0000

Many thanks. Exactly what I was looking for.

Comment on PureMVC: First thoughts & FlashDevelop templates by devdave

devdave — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 08:16:41 +0000

For a long time this is exactly what I did; I had my own framework developed over a number of years which worked very well and certainly required less code than PureMVC. However every now and again something would come up in a project which required me to fight with the framework to get something done and I’d end up extending the framework to cope with it. Finally I had myself a great framework to code on - and you know what? It wasn’t that different from PureMVC

Its true that PureMVC applications do have a lot of supporting code, but I never actually have to write any of these by hand; I have templates for Mediators, Proxies and Commands (FlashDevelop versions available from this site), macros for common lines of code (e.g. var somethingProxy:SomethingProxy = facade.retrieveProxy(SomethingProxy.NAME) as SomethingProxy) and a PureMVC plugin to add and remove notification listeners to Mediators.

Its true that handovers can have lots of lines of code, but I argue as to whether or not this a problem. As a developer on an existing project I would far prefer to receive a larger codebase based around PureMVC conventions in which I instantly know where everything is and how it communicates internally, instead of having to learn someone’s custom framework anew each time. Since a good chunk of the codebase is instantly recognisable as PureMVC scaffolding I just disregard that and can go straight to the important bits.

Personally I would say the best thing about PureMVC is that it gives developers a common framework to use and (theoretically, as you say ) they should be able to pick up a project a lot easier than if a custom framework has been used.

I’d say the size of the codebase is irrelevant; to me the worst thing about PureMVC is that it can encourage developers to just ‘follow the PureMVC way’ and not really think about the patterns or what they are doing. PureMVC should lay the foundations and you can then engineer your project on top of that in the best way for the app.

This is an interesting article; I don’t necessarily agree with it all but there are some good points there - http://www.simple-talk.com/community/blogs/alex/archive/2009/03/19/72519.aspx

Dave