Mailing-List: contact flex-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of cosmacol@gmail.com designates
 209.85.215.47 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <52B2F252-22C7-4375-BE97-50B8B75F0A3F@classsoftware.com>
References: 
 <CA+W8zUNOB22-aSa0uXqnp4Uo9VycVkijsL9KVvSdnencd5UMXg@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F6BB7E0.3030202@thedevprocess.com>
 <CA+W8zUMAtaR9+4gSkSpaVM_8S5NmBZZx2Ny8-AH32PFs7eBVfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F6E1578.8070606@thedevprocess.com>
 <52B2F252-22C7-4375-BE97-50B8B75F0A3F@classsoftware.com>
From: Cosma Colanicchia <cosmacol@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 09:41:08 +0200
Message-ID: 
 <CA+W8zUMWOuhUAFVdz_+OpDhFmWyKD65HtpDrLSUqQRRfzayv-A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Actionscript workers and async locking?
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

@LeftRight: about faults.. the first idea on my mind was simply
translating fault events into standard Error throwing, so you can use
normal try/catch logic to handle failed sequences instead of
explicitly analyzing the result of each "synchronized" invocation.

@Robert: exactly, I don't really care about improving response time,
I'd just like to write this kind of logic in a linear method instead
of having it scattered in multiple event listener methods.. it's about
code readability and verbosity. Thanks very much for the links, I'm
going to read it carefully.

@Roland: as3commons-async looks nice, it looks that they are trying,
with the Task class, to mitigate the same pain I was talking about. I
think that, without any real "thread locking" API, it can't get much
better than this.

@Martin: that would be an improvement: using premises instead of
creating a lot of ICountProvider and IConditionProvider to express
control flows (probably, they could be built on top of these
interfaces).

I feel like a lot of people tried and are trying to address the
disadvantages of coding async control flows. So I ask myself again:
with worker threads, wouldn't it be simpler to just ask to synchronize
the thread on the async token, i.e. locking it until result/fault?


Cosma


2012/3/26 Justin Mclean <justin@classsoftware.com>:
> Hi,
>
>> It sounds like you really can't do much about the timing of your bootstr=
ap if one call is dependent upon the result of your prior call. Even if you=
 had threads available, you'd be waiting the same amount of time.
>
> Event maps in the Mate framework I find quite useful for this sort of iss=
ue (http://mate.asfusion.com/).
>
> Here's a code snippet (from an old Flex3 project I had lying about so mig=
ht be a little out of date) that give you a feel for event maps in Mate:
>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0<EventHandlers type=3D"{LoginEvent.ATTEMPT_USE=
RLOGIN}">
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0<RemoteObjectInvok=
er instance=3D"{service.loginService}" method=3D"getLoggedOnUser">
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=
=A0 =C2=A0<resultHandlers>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=
=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0<MethodInvoker generator=3D"{SelfRegW=
izard}" method=3D"loginAccountStatus" arguments=3D"{resultObject}" />
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=
=A0 =C2=A0</resultHandlers>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=
=A0 =C2=A0<faultHandlers>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=
=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0<EventAnnouncer generator=3D"{ReportE=
vent}" constructorArguments=3D"{[ReportEvent.WARNING, 'loginFailed', 'Login=
 Failed']}" />
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=
=A0 =C2=A0</faultHandlers>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0</RemoteObjectInvo=
ker>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0</EventHandlers>
>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0<EventHandlers type=3D"{LoginEvent.SUCCESSFUL_=
LOGIN}">
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0<RemoteObjectInvok=
er instance=3D"{service.loginService}" method=3D"getLoggedOnUser">
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=
=A0 =C2=A0<resultHandlers>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=
=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0<PropertySetter generator=3D"{SelfReg=
Wizard}" sourceKey=3D"{selfRegModel.newAccount}" targetKey=3D"newAccount"/>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=
=A0 =C2=A0</resultHandlers>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0</RemoteObjectInvo=
ker>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0</EventHandlers>
>
> Thanks,
> Justin