goto http://www.davidtucker.net/category/cairngorm/ for great resource about Cairngorm.

@Murugavel, your description of the application is unclear. If you’re using multiple browser windows, I think no single Flex application framework will work for you, by itself. You’ll need some type of scripting to help you along. So I’ll urge you to question why you need to use multiple browser windows. That may make your solution simpler.

I have been working on a flex based web project where we need to handle multiple views. Say for example two same screens with diffrent data. Basically we have window kind of an functionality(maximize,minimize) in web. So the user can open two screen but they will allowd to enter different data.

If I use cairingorm, the model objects are singleton. It’s very difficult to keep the state of the screen when the minimize and maxmize.

Could you please tell me what architecture best suite above need? if you can mail me the details it would be great..

baoandassociates.com#selectedTab=3

I do not think we need too many frameworks on Flex and learn the lesson from Java.

From the little that I’ve read, it seems that Mate, Prana, Aconcagua and Swiz are in a similar IoC boat. All of which can be attached to Cairngorm or PureMVC or stand on its own.

However, Mate, IMO, is still the most different from the rest in that the configuration is not just for dependency injection but orchestration, as well. Whether that’s good or bad depends on the complexity of the project. Mate would have more difficulty handling complex event flows.

I would wait and see what happens to Prana before using it on a project that starts tomorrow, though. I’m looking forward to its Spring ActionScript switch and addition of the MVCS support. Maybe then, I’ll rewrite this article.

Aconcagua still seems raw to me. Documentation is limited to examples. No how-to’s. I still don’t understand why their beans, modules, and MVC support is separately packaged.

I agree that Swiz is definitely something to consider. I wouldn’t say it’s easier than Mate. Wiring is easier. But Swiz is different in that Mate has a controller, while you have to build a controller in Swiz. This would be better for complex applications. But I do like how Mate view components do not have Mate code in them, but I agree this can be both good and bad.

I wasn’t able to explore the X2O framework in more detail. But since the

X2O is a web-based data modeling platform for Flex (and Flash CS4) apps that generates the server-side infrastructure (database, server-side, web services) as well as generated AS3 value objects in a SWC file. You don’t have to do any rpc or remoting integration. It handles all the backend integration for you and you get strongly-typed AS3 objects in your SWC. It also has nice features like file uploading and email object (all the server infrastructure is already set up).

Instead of having to build all the tedious database/server-side backend that comes with a db-driven Flex app, it lets you focus on Flex programming. You have all your data management built automatically. Its a much cleaner and higher-level solution than something like direct PHP/MySQL or SQL/.NET to Flex setup since there’s no need to work in another language.