I'm new to programming and I've been checking a lot of game coding tutorials. I've noticed that on most of them they use custom events to trigger methods instead of calling a method directly.
What's the reasoning behind this practice? Why aren't they just calling the method?
For example:
We have two objects: A and B. A has method A.methodA() that B needs to use when X condition is triggered.
Why implement:
B dispatches an event to A that tells A to run A.methodA()
Instead of:
B uses A.methodA()
The main reason is separation of interests. When using events, class A doesn't need to know about the existence of class B (and vice versa).
Some benefits to this are:
Much easier unit testing (you can test Class A without class B)
Less chance of breaking your code when you change class A or B
Less references to other classes in your code, which reduces the potential for memory leaks
Cleaner code
More flexible/reusable code (a bunch of other classes could all listen/respond to the event without any additional code in the your dispatcher)
Typically in bigger applications using events will help abstract everything. When you have 15+ classes and they're all ditpatching events to a controller, it's a lot easier to figure out what's going on than reading through all different parts of the code to trace functions. Using callbacks begins to create spaghetti code.
However, direct function calls are going to be executed faster than events.
Personally, I use custom events simply for the ease of use. I can have one class dispatch an event when something happens (say an animation finishes or an error occurs in a download) and any number of other classes run any number of other functions based on that event. In addition, I code for reusability. The goal of each class is complete independence so that it can run in any project without needing other packages. So rather than have one class call a method of another class, I dispatch an event from the first class that the second class listens for and then run that method. Then when I need that first class for another project, I can just copy/paste it without having to modify it and without losing any functionality.
EDIT:
Also, it's worth noting that sometimes people do what you describe to get around having to pass in event arguments.
Say you have a button on the stage and you need to be able to click it, but you also need to be able to manually call that method. Some people don't realize you can pass in a null event and have only the single method. Or you can set it as a null default argument, see below:
private function onClickHandler( e:MouseEvent = null ):void{
//as long as you never reference "e" within this method, this method can be used both for MouseEvent listeners and manually calling it elsewhere in the code
}
That technique can help avoid having an event handler that only calls another method and nothing else. At this point in my programming, every single AS3 event handler I write sets the event argument to null by default. It just makes things easier later on.
You might want to read this.
And also note using the callback method allows you to pass parameters to it directly and not via a custom event model.
I built my own, very simplified, events dispatcher system. AS Event model is very powerful, but in 99% of situations you don't need that power. A simple callback with parameters fired as an event is more than enough. You can still retain the versatility from an event model, but don't need to write too many lines of code for, let's say, a simple button.
I can setup a simple event like this:
Buttonizer.autoButton(_buttQuit, this, "onPress");
public function onPressQuit(c:Sprite) {
// Execution goes here
}
You can build your own event model, it will make life simpler, and your code much more concise.
Related
This might be a silly question. But how can I call a function (to execute) from a class to the timeline.
For example, I have the class "Test" and I want to execute the function "Next" on the timline (which it is only a function to show next slide).
Hope you understand what I'm trying to do.
Thank you!
The best practice for communication (in this scenario!) is to use Events.
The timeline create the object of your class Test and registers an
event listener.
The object of your class Test dispatch an Event.
The function that the timeline registered for that Event will be executed.
Please take a look at this question that wants to send additional information to the main timeline. In your case, you do not need a custom Event, because you do not want to send any information along. You only want to communicate the occurrence of the event. You can put that information into the type of the event. an example for a dispatch could look like this:
dispatchEvent(new Event("next"));
Creating a custom class allows you to put that String literal that describes the type into a constant, which prevents errors caused by accidentally misspelling the type. That might be a reason to create a custom Event class anyway, even only for the sake of a place to put those constants.
dispatchEvent(new PresentationEvent(PresentationEvent.NEXT));
Again, this would do the same as the previous line. this is also covered in the other question and the answer to it. Please take a look.
Is there a way to fire a custom KeyUp/KeyDown event on the CoreWindow?
For example, take the following event:http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/windows.ui.core.corewindow.keyup.aspx.
My application already uses CoreWindow::KeyUp and CoreWindow::KeyDown to handle events. I am trying to test that the correct delegates are being attached and thus called when an event happens.
Note that I can't call the delegate function directly since it will not test the fact that the delegate is attached to the event.
I am looking for an answer similar to https://stackoverflow.com/a/3977396/756356.
I doubt that's possible because it sounds like something possibly interfering with the sandbox concept of modern apps. You could maybe insert some layer between the CoreWindow and your handlers and bubble the events through that layer to make is possible to raise your proxy events. I would recommend against that though since that just adds code you don't need.
What exactly will this addActionListener Do.....we we call button.addActionListener(this) what will happen
It basically adds this (the current object) to a list of objects that will be notified when the component has an action performed on it, such as a button being pressed.
It's a way of registering your interest in what is happening to the component and is useful in that you don't have to keep polling a component to check its status.
Your object (or class, really) simply implements the interface methods for listening (such as actionPerformed) and that method will be called for each event that happens.
The Java tutorials have a large variety of different articles on the various listeners that you're likely to use.
I was on the point of start using AS3 Signals for my new project because Native Events has a bad reputation, and then I found this:
http://code.google.com/p/nineveh-responder/
But I couldn't find more information (in addition to official docs and tuts).
What do you think about NResponder?
OT: I can't create the tag "NResponder" in this question because is new :(
NResponder goes above and beyond the call of duty. It is soo easy to use and learn. The real difference maker is its NResponder.remove(action,function,target) method.
It has the ability to remove all event listeners that fall under the parameters provided. In one call, you can remove all listeners associated to one object(target), any listeners associated to a certain function, listeners that respond to a certain event like MouseEvent.CLICK, or any combination of these parameters.
Is it possible to raise built-in MS Access form events programmatically? I have a
feeling it isn't but thought I would check. (I am using Access 2003).
For instance, I want to do something like this within a private sub on the
form:
RaiseEvent Delete(Cancel)
and have it trigger the Access.Form delete event -- i.e. without actually
deleting a bound record.
Note my delete event is not handled by the form itself but by an external
class, so I can't simply call Form_Delete(Cancel).
I can understand your confusion -- I didn't explain any of the bigger context. Sorry.
Basically, the situation is I have an 'index' i.e. 'continuous-forms' form which is bound to a read-only query. The query has to be read only because it involves an outer join. But, I want to be able to delete underlying records from this form.
So my first thought was to do the deletion outside the form recordset, eg. using a delete query. And I was hoping to hook the standard Delete/BeforeDelConfirm/AfterDelConfirm events around this manual deletion routine by raising these events myself. But alas, this is not possible.
If the form itself handled these events, I could simply call the handlers (Form_Delete, etc), but my project has custom classes that handle form delete and update events (validation, confirmation, logging, etc.) for all the forms. (#Smandoli, it's not well-documented, I just discovered it a few months ago and use it extensively now -- maybe you know about it already -- you can set up external classes to handle your form events. See for example here)
Long story short, I found a workaround I'm satisfied with. It involves making the 'index' form a subform of another form that is bound to a recordset that can be deleted from. So the deletion can be done in the outer form using the standard Access form events, based on the selection in the inner form.
#Knox, I disagree in principle that being able to raise 'built-in' events yourself is difficult to document and maintain. Plenty of other frameworks depend on it. In practice, I agree with you, since we all have to work within the limitations of our tools and 'best practices' that evolve around those limitations. The blessing and curse of Access is its tight binding between recordsets and forms...
In common, there is simply no need to fire standard form events on your own, normally this shows a wrong understanding of form events in general (if not even events in general).
The form events exists to react on user interaction with the form or to notify the code behind of something that generally happens (like the Form_Load event). The event subs are there to react on these event - nothing more.
It is an often seen thing that people wants to execute event subs directly, but that's also a wrong way. There is a reason why event subs are in general declared as "Private" and not "Public", it should prevent calling them directly from outside the code module, but in fact you should also not execute any of them inside the same code module. Event subs always has to be called exclusively by their events, although it's possible to call them directly.
If an event sub has any code which should be executed also elsewhere then create a private or public sub inside the same module (depending on if you want to execute them from outside or not) and then call this sub from the event sub. If you think you must execute the same sub from elsewhere you can now also call the same sub. This is not a question of "it is possible to call the event sub directly", it is mainly a design question. You should always be sure that an event sub was called only by the event itself and never by any code. The problem when calling an event sub by code is that you can get in trouble very fast if you execute a code and also a real event executes it. In the end you get a big chaos of code which is very hard to debug.
It is, by the way, of course possible to call the event subs from a class module which has a reference to the form (which is needed if you use the class module to handle general events). You only would need to declare the event subs as Public and then you can call them with the form reference, but as stated above: Don't do that.
If a class module is used to handle the events then you can do anything here, you don't need the form code.
If a query is read only and you want to delete a record of a base table no event sub could help you. They are fired when the user wants to delete something which he can't do because it's read only so DoCmd does also not help you.
Like David said in the comment above, simply create a Delete button anywhere you want which can then read out the ID of the current row in the continous form and start a "DELETE" SQL command, then simply requery the continous form and you're done. You can also handle this in your standard class module because you can not only forward form events you can also forward control events on the same way. Create an Init procedure in your class module which takes all the controls from your form you want to handle with it any maybe additional the name of the base table in each continous form, then the class module can assign it to a standard "WithEvents" defined control variable of for example type CommandButton and save the base table name to a string variable. (Don't forget to set the OnClick event to "[Event Procedure]" in the Init procedure.)
In the Load event of your continous form where you probably initialize your class module you can then forward the base table name and the delete button control to the Init procedure of the class module which then can handle the deletion on a very generic way by starting a DELETE query on the base table and requery the form because it already has the form reference also. No need to call any event procedure.
Last but not least: Maybe there are frameworks which allow you to raise events directly but in common I would say that the creators of such frameworks also didn't understand the purpose of event procedures. If you have ever created an own event in a class module of your own you will see that they also cannot be raised outside the class module. Of course, you CAN create a "RaiseEvent" sub on your own to call them externally - and in fact, in case of own events it can make sense in some scenarios. In case of form (control...) events they should inform the code about something happened and there should be a reaction now. If you use events in own class modules you would normally also create a "WithEvents" variable in the outside module to get informed when an event happened in the other class module. An event should make it possible to make the module objects independent of each other. The module with the event will only raise the event and it doesn't know if anyone is listening to it or react on this event. It informs "the world" that there was something which happened in the class module, nothing else. Like a radio station which sends the daily news "to the world" but it doesn't know about if anyone listens to it. Normally, no listener of the radio station would go to the radio station and reads his own news for other listeners. Only the people at the radio station decides what to send and when. Same story.