I have a PresentationModel AS class that holds all the values used in SomeView.mxml. The entire class for the model is bindable, and the model property in the view is also bindable. However, I am unable to inject the model into the view using the PropertyInjector tag:
- INFO: Data binding will not be able to detect assignments to model
Would someone familier with Flex data binding and Mate give me a hand? Thanks a lot!
MainEventMap.mxml
<EventHandlers type="{FlexEvent.INITIALIZE}">
<ObjectBuilder generator="{PresentationModel}" registerTarget="true">
<Properties dispatcher="{scope.dispatcher}"/>
</ObjectBuilder>
</EventHandlers>
<Injectors target="{SomeView}" debug="true">
<PropertyInjector targetKey="model" source="{PresentationModel}" />
</Injectors>
Snippet from PresentationModel.as
[Bindable]
public class PresentationModel extends EventDispatcher
{
public var dispatcher:IEventDispatcher;
//.....other variables and functions
}
Snippet from SomeView.mxml
<mx:Canvas xmlns:mx="http://www.adobe.com/2006/mxml" width="518" height="562" >
<mx:Script>
<![CDATA[
//...... all the imports
[Bindable]
public var model:OSGiBrokerConsoleModel;
// ......other variables and functions
]]>
</mx:Script>
// ..... actual view components
</mx:Canvas>
You can safely ignore that information message.
That message is usually shown when you have a PropetyInjector with source and source key, where the property defined by "sourceKey" is not bindable, so we want to make sure you know that the current value of that property will be the only one the target will ever get (when the property is not bindable, the value is copied and no binding is established). That may or may not be what you want.
In this case, there is no sourceKey, because you don't want to bind to any specific property of the source. Instead, you want to pass the whole PM to the view. Because of that, you don't want to establish a binding, just send the value to the view once.
In the cases where there is no sourceKey or when you are simply sending a one-off value (ie: when you are sending a constant), the message can be ignored.
You cannot bind to a class. Making a class bindable means all members of that class will be bindable, but not the definition itself.
You should create a member function(getter/setter) for the presentation model that returns the data you want to use as the source. Then you also need to create an instance of PresentationModel that you can use for the binding. So rather than binding to PresentationModel.data, you'd bind to myPM.data.
Related
I've got a bindable model class (lets call it myModel) with two properties, label and value. The value gets updated frequently, so it is marked as bindable.
Works fine so far, the data is updated and the standard property change event is dispatched.
Now I have to make an ArrayCollection from the object instances of this model to use it as a data provider in a data group. The data gets then passed to a custom itemRenderer in which I access the myModel properties via data.label and data.value.
The only problem I've got now is that the myModel value property doesn't change any more (I suppose because I stored the objects in the ArrayCollection).
The ArrayCollection is marked bindable as well btw, because new object instances of myModel can be added during runtime.
Is there any way to make this work? Any help regarding this would be much appreciated!
Edit: I almost forgot, the value object in the myModel class is updated by another bindable class. Yes, I know that's bonkers but that's why I'm here, to get some input on a simpler (and in fact working) way to solve this problem.
2nd edit: Allright guys, a little bit of code to illustrate the issue;
Lets start with the first bindable class;
[Bindable]
public class FirstClass
{
public var name:String;
public var firstValue:Number;
public var secondValue:Number;
public var thirdValue:Number;
public function FirstClass()
{ }
}
The values (first to third) get updated by a controller class. So far so good.
Now to the second model class (for matters of consistency, lets keep the MyClass name)
[Bindable]
public class MyClass
{
public var label:String;
public var value:Number;
public function FirstClass()
{ }
}
These are the two model classes. Background behind this is that I need a String value (a label) for each property of an instance of FirstClass. I'd like to make this simpler, so I'm really not settled on this "solution" cough ;).
Anyhow, we've got the two models, now to my .mxml class;
[Bindable] private var firstClassInstance:FirstClass;
I create a new ArrayCollection and add objects like this;
myArrayCollection.addItem(new MyClass("This is a label", firstClassInstance.firstValue));
And again, the DataGroup uses this ArrayCollection as a data provider.
As we already established (thank you #Windowns), the ArrayCollection looks only for objects being added or removed, not property changes of these objects.
Call itemUpdated on your ArrayCollection when you update a "piece" of an item stored in it.
There could be many issues with binding. Please post code to help us see what is happening. Here are some "high level" things to watch out for that might answer your question
When using an bindable arraycollection of objects, it's important to note that the binding for the arraycollection only looks at each object instance and if it's added or removed from the collection. It will not know about any property changes that occur to your object. Commonly when you use an itemrenderer, the properties are bound to display elements. Like maybe the "value" property bound to a label in the itemrenderer. Now when your object instance (myModel) changes it's "value" property the label should pick it up. Also note that you need to mark any properties you intend to bind to visual elements with the [Bindable] meta-tag.
public class myModel
{
[Bindable]
public var label:String;
[Bindable]
public var value:String;
public function myModel() {}
}
Answer after code post:
When you do the following:
myArrayCollection.addItem(new MyClass("This is a label", firstClassInstance.firstValue));
You are taking the value of firstClassInstance.firstValue and supplying it as a hard value (as in not passing value by reference). So if you do the following:
myArrayCollection.getItemAt(addedClassIndex).value = 5;
Will not cause any changes to be noted in the firstClassInstance.firstValue as there is no "referening information" stored. We are only working with the basic type of Number which is never passed by reference like all other objects are in Flex.
Maybe try this:
[Bindable]
public class MyClass
{
public var label:String;
[Bindable] //might be redundant due to global [Bindable] flag, been a while since i've used a global one
public function get value():Number{
return m_objRef.firstValue;
}
public function set value(value:Number):void{
m_objRef.firstValue = value;
}
private var m_objRef:FirstClass;
public function MyClass(_label:String, _valueObj:FirstClass) {
m_objRef = _valueObj;
label = _label;
}
}
Allright guys (and gals ;)) after two hours of messing around with BindingUtils, I finally found the solution to my problem.
The two model classes can remain the way they are, so passing the instance of FirstClass isn't necessary.
Simply binding the value properties of FirstClass to the value field of MyClass works as expected and the values in the ArrayCollection get updated as well.
So the solution;
myClassObject = new MyClass();
myClassObject.label = "This is a label";
BindingUtils.bindProperty(myClassObject, "value", firstClassObject, "firstValue");
And then simply add the myClassObject to the ArrayCollection.
Keep in mind that all the code here is pseudo code, so never mind any typos.
Still, #Windowns suggesting with passing the FirstClass object to the MyClass will be incorporated into my final solution as it makes switching between properties a lot easier (FirstClass has got lots of them, not just the 4 in my first post). Many thanks for that!
I took Amy's advice and researched a little further on the itemUpdated method. Turns out, the solution was right there.
See here: http://flex4examples.wordpress.com/2009/08/28/1st/
I applied this methodology (with little variations) to my code and it works quite good. Performance on the iPad2 is good and so is the memory usage of my component.
Let's hope that Amy is fine with this solution as well. Fingers crossed. ;)
Why doesn't the Flex framework's mxml language support a constructor for components or accept constructor arguments for components? It's as far as I know not possible to declare an ActionScript object in mxml if it takes constructor arguments. I'm curious about the reason. Is it a design choice by Adobe or related to how declarative languages work? For example, why not allow:
<myNameSpace:MyComponent constructor="{argArray}"/>
You can read IMXMLObject help API for more information about your question. They're not telling exactly why an mxml doesn't support constructors, but it says that you must control your mxml component throught its lifecycle events: preinitialize, initialize and creationComplete.
I suppose that's a design decision, considering that an mxml gets translated directly to AS3 code (you can compile your application adding keep-generated-actionscript=true and see what it produces).
Even if a class is defined in MXML, it is possible to implement a constructor via instantiating an instance variable as follows. This will get called before various events like "preinitialize" or "creationComplete" are dispatched.
<myNameSpace:MyComponent>
<fx:Script>
<![CDATA[
private var ignored:* = myInstanceConstructor();
private function myInstanceConstructor():* {
// Do something - called once per instance
return null;
}
]]>
</fx:Script>
</myNameSpace:MyComponent>
Moreover, class variables can be initialized in a similar way as follows.
<myNameSpace:MyComponent>
<fx:Script>
<![CDATA[
private static var ignored:* = myClassConstructor();
private static function myClassConstructor():* {
// Do something - called once per class
return null;
}
]]>
</fx:Script>
</myNameSpace:MyComponent>
Since I found the webpages explaning the bindable propety quite confusing,so I would like to post my question here,which is quite simple,if I declare a variable to be bindable,does that mean whenever I changed the value of this variable in another class,all appearence of this variable will be synchronized to be the same value at the same time?
Say,if boolean variable "select" is declared to be bindable in Class A and default to be false,and we have an if statement in class A like if(select).
Then in another class,we changed the value of "select" to be true,will that if(select) statement pass the test ?
Also,how about the following setter method that is defined to be bindable:
[Bindable]
public function set isShowingAvg(b:Boolean):void
{
_isShowingAvg = b;
hasChanged();
}
Does this code imply that changing the value of _isShowingAvg is also going to be broadcasted?
Thanks in advance.
Thanks for your idea.
Declaring a property as Bindable means that when you change the value, an event will get broadcasted. This event enables data binding, but it's not necessarily automatic.
If the consuming class is MXML and you use brackets, like this:
<mx:Button enabled="{selected}" />
Then the MXML compiler will generate the appropriate binding code and anytime selected changes, enabled will also get changed.
If you're using it outside MXML then you'll either subscribe to the event to detect changes or use BindingUtils.
In your example I think you need to mark the getter [Bindable] and not the setter.
example:
public static const SHOWING_AVG_CHANGED:String = "showingAvgChangedEvent";
[Bindable(event="showingAvgChangedEvent")]
public function get isShowingAvg():Boolean
{
return _isShowingAvg;
}
public function set isShowingAvg(isShowing:Boolean):void
{
_isShowingAvg = isShowing;
dispatchEvent(new Event(SHOWING_AVG_CHANGED));
}
I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding the binding in Flex. I'm using Cairngorm framework. I have the following component with code like:
[Bindable]
var _model:LalModelLocator = LalModelLocator.getInstance();
....
<s:DataGroup dataProvider="{_model.friendsSearchResults}"
includeIn="find"
itemRenderer="com.lal.renderers.SingleFriendDisplayRenderer">
<s:layout>
<s:TileLayout orientation="columns" requestedColumnCount="2" />
</s:layout> </s:DataGroup>
in the model locator:
[Bindable]
public var friendsSearchResults:ArrayCollection = new ArrayCollection();
Inside the item renderer there is a button that calls a command and inside the command results there is a line like this:
model.friendsSearchResults = friendsSearchResults;
Putting break points and stepping through the code I confirmed that this like gets called and the friendsSearchResults gets updated.
To my understanding if I update a bindable variable it should automatically re-render the s:DataGroup which has a dataProvider of that variable.
There's nothing obviously wrong in the code sample. It should work so I think there's a problem elsewhere.
I would recommend setting a breakpoint where the dataProvider is assigned and also where model.friendsSearchResults is assigned. Make sure they're both pointing to the same object instance. Then step through the property assignment and corresponding event.
To make debugging easier you can switch to using a named event instead of the default. With a named event, only event listeners interested in your particular property are triggered instead of any listeners listening for any property change. This is easier to debug and will run faster. For example, change:
[Bindable]
public var results:ArrayCollection;
to
[Bindable("resultsChanged")]
private var _results:ArrayCollection;
public function get results():ArrayCollection {
return _results;
}
public function set results(value:ArrayCollection):Void {
_results = value;
dispatchEvent(new Event("resultsChanged"));
}
Another thing to keep in mind is that bindings hide certain errors like null reference exceptions. They assume the value simply isn't available yet and suppress the error. Stepping through the assignment and related bindings will help find a problem like this.
I have a custom actionscript object defined as bindable with a number of public properties.
[Bindable]
public class MyObject extends Object {
public var mobileNumber:String;
...
In my mxml I have:
<mx:Script><![CDATA[
import mx.binding.utils.BindingUtils;
import org.test.MyObject;
[Bindable]
private var obj: MyObject = new MyObject();
]]></mx:Script>
<mx:Label text="Mobile Number" id="mobileNumberLabel"/>
<mx:TextInput id="mobileNumberText" text="{obj.mobileNumber}" />
<mx:LinkButton label="Load" id="loadButton" enabled="true" click="obj = obj.load();"/>
<mx:LinkButton label="Save" id="saveButton" enabled="true" click="obj.write();"/>
My issue is that when I enter a new value in the field for mobile number and then click the save button, the value typed is not logged out... i.e.:
public function write():void {
var bytes:ByteArray = new ByteArray();
trace("write - mobile:" + this.mobileNumber);
bytes.writeObject(this);
EncryptedLocalStore.setItem(KEY, bytes);
}
I also tried adding in:
private function init():void {
BindingUtils.bindProperty(mobileNumberText, "text", obj, "mobileNumber");
}
but no luck with that either.
I'm probably missing something simple here, but not sure what it is. Hope you can help, thanks.
tst's answer is correct - bindings are one-way. I'm guessing you already knew that though, since you tried to setup the reverse binding in your init() method.
However, there's two problems with your init() method.
First, it's not clear where you put that init() method, or what calls it.
Second, you got the method parameters backwards.
What I typically do in situations like this is either use the mxml tag as the first responder suggested, or if I'm in AS3 code, I do something like this:
private function onCreationComplete(event:Event):void
{
BindingUtils.bindProperty(obj, "mobileNumber", mobileNumberText, ["text"]);
}
Note a couple of points here:
1/ BindingUtils.bindProperty() is "left hand side = right hand side". Thus, it's kinda like writing
obj.mobileNumber = mobileNumberText.text;
Or, closer to what is "actually going on" inside the binding classes:
obj["mobileNumber"] = mobileNumberText["text"];
2/ BindingUtils.bindProperty() actually wants an array as the last param. This is so that you can do "chained properties" logically like:
obj.mobileNumber = mobileNumbersGrid.selectedItem.text;
which would be
BindingUtils.bindProperty(obj, "mobileNumber", mobileNumbersGrid,
["selectedItem", "text"]);
3/ Best practice tip: if you're binding a property chain whose initial member is a property of yourself (this), then write it as:
BindingUtils.bindProperty(obj, "mobileNumber", this,
["mobileNumbersGrid", "selectedItem", "text"]);
This neatly handles the case where your "right hand side object" this.mobileNumbersGrid instance itself is replaced with a new instance object.
4/ If you ever reassign obj ("the left hand side"), you need to create a new binding to the new obj instance. Typically, you do this by turning the local obj property into a getter/setter pair like this:
public function get obj():MyObject
{
return _obj;
}
private var _obj:MyObject = new MyObject();
public function set obj(value:MyObject):void
{
_obj = value;
BindingUtils.bindProperty(_obj, "mobileNumber", mobileNumberText, ["text"]);
}
(Note: to be really careful, you'd stash the returned value from BindingUtils.bindProperty() which is a ChangeWatcher instance, and you'd unwatch() to prevent the old object from receiving property changes)
Hope this helps. Bindings are among the most powerful tools in the Flex framework, but can cause a lot of headaches when used poorly. In particular, be aware of memory leaks and "unexpected updates" when bindings are left "hanging around".
This code:
<mx:TextInput id="mobileNumberText" text="{obj.mobileNumber}" />
makes a one-directional binding between obj.mobileNumber and mobileNumberText.text. What you need is an additional reverse binding - add the following line to your code and it will work:
<mx:Binding source="mobileNumberText.text" destination="obj.mobileNumber"/>
Did you try implementing IEventDispatcher, or extending EventDispatcher?
Bindings work through dispatching of PropertyChangeEvents, so maybe this is the problem?
also, I am not sure, whether bindings work on variables, or whether they require properties (getters/setters).
You should try compiling with -keep-generated-actionscript and see if the resulting code makes any sense, i.e. dispatches any events, if the variable is accessed ...