<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Using the Abstract Factory pattern with Flex</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mxml.it/index.php/2009/02/13/using-the-abstract-factory-pattern-with-flex/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mxml.it/index.php/2009/02/13/using-the-abstract-factory-pattern-with-flex/</link>
	<description>avoid mickey mouse programming</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2010 18:20:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Giorgio Natili</title>
		<link>http://www.mxml.it/index.php/2009/02/13/using-the-abstract-factory-pattern-with-flex/comment-page-1/#comment-786</link>
		<dc:creator>Giorgio Natili</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2009 07:51:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mxml.it/index.php/2009/02/13/using-the-abstract-factory-pattern-with-flex/#comment-786</guid>
		<description>Hi Emanuele,

Thanks for your comment, I believe that your idea is good, the only concern that I have is if you encounter in your development a server side team that is not so smart, but it&#039;s trough, sending a value object and handling it on the server is a smarter solution...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Emanuele,</p>
<p>Thanks for your comment, I believe that your idea is good, the only concern that I have is if you encounter in your development a server side team that is not so smart, but it&#8217;s trough, sending a value object and handling it on the server is a smarter solution&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Emanuele Spinella</title>
		<link>http://www.mxml.it/index.php/2009/02/13/using-the-abstract-factory-pattern-with-flex/comment-page-1/#comment-780</link>
		<dc:creator>Emanuele Spinella</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2009 01:04:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mxml.it/index.php/2009/02/13/using-the-abstract-factory-pattern-with-flex/#comment-780</guid>
		<description>Very good job! I think that you should write other articles related to the design patterns, because your approach is very easy to understand and implement following the examples.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very good job! I think that you should write other articles related to the design patterns, because your approach is very easy to understand and implement following the examples.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Emanuele Spinella</title>
		<link>http://www.mxml.it/index.php/2009/02/13/using-the-abstract-factory-pattern-with-flex/comment-page-1/#comment-779</link>
		<dc:creator>Emanuele Spinella</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2009 00:50:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mxml.it/index.php/2009/02/13/using-the-abstract-factory-pattern-with-flex/#comment-779</guid>
		<description>I would like to extend your work with some considerations:
The credit card presenters have a duplicated submit method, because all the credit cards have the same fields, regardless of the type (Visa, American Express, etc).
Maybe it would be better to write a CreditCardPresenter super-class, that implements the submit() public method and from which AmericanExpressCreditCard e VisaCreditCard derive.
We can do also another thing: CreditCardPresenter, ECheck and PayPal classes have to create their own VO (Value Objects), in order to communicate, for example, with a server. VO are of three different types because, for each of those payment types, there are different informations to provide.
However, you can think to unify the submit method with an empty interface (e.g. IPayment) that all the VO have to implement.
Following this approach, the submit method can send an IPayment object and can be shared by all the presenters.
So we can have a super-presenter that implements the submit method and we can reach a more abstract, modular and flexible structure.
I&#039;ve send you a class diagram that should explain better what I mean.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would like to extend your work with some considerations:<br />
The credit card presenters have a duplicated submit method, because all the credit cards have the same fields, regardless of the type (Visa, American Express, etc).<br />
Maybe it would be better to write a CreditCardPresenter super-class, that implements the submit() public method and from which AmericanExpressCreditCard e VisaCreditCard derive.<br />
We can do also another thing: CreditCardPresenter, ECheck and PayPal classes have to create their own VO (Value Objects), in order to communicate, for example, with a server. VO are of three different types because, for each of those payment types, there are different informations to provide.<br />
However, you can think to unify the submit method with an empty interface (e.g. IPayment) that all the VO have to implement.<br />
Following this approach, the submit method can send an IPayment object and can be shared by all the presenters.<br />
So we can have a super-presenter that implements the submit method and we can reach a more abstract, modular and flexible structure.<br />
I&#8217;ve send you a class diagram that should explain better what I mean.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
