flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rick Winscot <rick.wins...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: ActionScript and Apache Flex
Date Thu, 12 Jan 2012 22:16:52 GMT

Speaking of marshal plan... any thoughts on how to deal with that going forward? 

The test cases that Adobe used / uses to validate marshal plan architecture and compatibility
are pretty important. Do the mustella tests cover that ground?

Rick Winscot

On Thursday, January 12, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Alex Harui wrote:

> On 1/12/12 3:58 AM, "David Arno" <david@davidarno.org (mailto:david@davidarno.org)>
> > Makes sense. As for performance issues, that's easy to predict. If we just
> > want compile-time support for enums, private constructors, abstract methods
> > and classes and the like, then none of them will have a significant impact
> > on runtime performance. All will impact (at least slightly) on compilation
> > times. Similarly, if we want runtime checking, then they'll have runtime
> > performance impacts.
> > 
> > I think all of: compiler-supported metadata, enums, private constructors,
> > abstract classes and generics would be easy to implement, as none require
> > special opcodes or do anything tricky with the VM. Other things (such as
> > method overloading and multiple inheritance/traits) would be impractical to
> > implement as the VM doesn't support them. Frustratingly though, until we get
> > our hands on the source if Falcon compiler, knowing the scope of work of
> > these tasks is difficult.
> > 
> > David.
> It is hard to say until we get going on it. One of the gotchas around a lot
> of these features is the ability to access properties and methods via
> obj["foo"] instead of obj.foo and how you check for things like that. You
> also have to take into account loading other SWFs so you can't always just
> optimize a single SWF.
> My thoughts around overloading was to just decorate the names sort of how I
> recall C++ does it. I don't know how Java does it. And overloading is the
> only thing I feel we need because it is probably the best solution to
> backwards compatibility across versions which is a must for many enterprise
> apps. Everything else is a nice-to have. There are some pretty good
> solutions out there without having those language features, but for sure,
> our backward compatibility story using Marshall Plan is not a pretty good
> solution.
> -- 
> Alex Harui
> Flex SDK Team
> Adobe Systems, Inc.
> http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message