incubator-flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aaron Miller <amil...@learnatvivid.com>
Subject RE: Why Spark? (was Re: s:Spacer (was Re: Missing Spark components))
Date Fri, 02 Mar 2012 20:14:16 GMT
Haha, yeah maybe you're right. I've always taken AOP as a loosely defined term (like OOP),
to mean the "composition of objects with cross-cutting concerns," where DI would be a design
pattern in which to achieve AOP. I didn't realize the term was specific to the methodology.
I always use DI to compose my Spark components anyways (ala skinning), so I guess it's a moot
point for me. :)

Cheers!

-
Aaron

-----Original Message-----
From: Roland Zwaga [mailto:roland@stackandheap.com] 
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2012 9:46 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Why Spark? (was Re: s:Spacer (was Re: Missing Spark components))

>
> > One of the re-occurring discussions on this list has been the desire 
> > to
> break down components into smaller parts.
> >
> > The spark architecture goes some way to achieving this. Take 
> > scrolling,
> if you want it you wrap you group on a Scroller
> > and off you go. Same for layouts. In this way spark is far more 
> > flexible
> and superior to mx along with its skinning model.
> >
> > Spark is about writing smaller parts that can be put together to 
> > make a
> whole, instead of each component having all the
> > functionality for every scenario baked in.
> >
> > Tink
>
> I believe this paradigm is referred to as Aspect Oriented Programming 
> (AOP), and IMHO, should be the way forward for Flex.
>

Hmmm, I think the right term would be composition-based design. In most cases dependency injection
would be the pattern to use to configure the compositions.
Sorry for being a smart-ass by the way... :)

Roland

Mime
View raw message