flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jeff Tapper" <j...@spoon.as>
Subject RE: minor Validator improvement
Date Mon, 26 Mar 2012 19:21:43 GMT
Good enough, I created the jira issue as I wasn't sure if the discussion was
enough, glad to hear it is.

-----Original Message-----
From: Alex Harui [mailto:aharui@adobe.com] 
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 2:51 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: minor Validator improvement

On 3/26/12 8:46 AM, "Omar Gonzalez" <omarg.developer@gmail.com> wrote:

> It sounds like a good idea, my only concern is breaking a bunch of 
> apps that are expecting Validator.validateAll() to return a plain 
> Array. I know there are some methods that were added, instead of 
> changed, to return Vectors as opposed to Arrays and not break existing 
> apps. I can't think of the method name I'm remembering, but I think 
> its one of the display objects that changed. Anyhow, not sure what our 
> approach should be for these kind of changes.
Adobe didn't care if we broke an app if it was for the "greater good".  And
we didn't convert Arrays to Vectors everywhere.  So I don't think there can
be a universal policy.  It has to be considered for each case because there
are trade-offs.  If the array is passed across a MarshallPlan boundary, then
I wouldn't change it.  If the array is likely to be passed back to the
server, then I wouldn't change it as it might screw up AMF serialization.
If the array is a vector of "anything" then I would be cautious.

BTW, I don't think it was necessary to fill out a JIRA issue.  We're
supposed to be watching commit emails and Jeff starting this discussion
should be good enough.

Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.

View raw message