flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Wasilewski <devudes...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: FalconJS has landed
Date Sat, 24 Nov 2012 23:42:07 GMT
> I'm a JS newbie.  What other output would be more desirable and why?

Well, I am JS newbie too. I guess even bigger than you ;)

But after Adobe ceased a fire on Flash Mobile Plug-in (that was 3times 
faster in execution speed that any JS comparable code on flash capable 
mobile devices)  I've spent some time on JS target. Especially when 
comes to JS and OOP. I have been running many tests and comparing 
efficiency and performance against the style you can choose from when 
writing JS.

This very subject is a bit 'liquid' as browser vendors seems to do a lot 
of work in favour of trends instead art of programming and sane logic, 
but in general standard JS prototyping seems to be more efficient 
solution. (Why I think this is wrong? Because they speeding up features 
of stuff like jQuerry or literal notation based frameworks and sacrifice 
the performance of standards of Ecma script, is not a addition, but 
trade-off, they adjusting technology to popularity of 3rd party solutions )

Some small tests involves jQuery and literal notation based frameworks 
shows that they gaining some speed over the time, sometimes they proved 
to be faster. (something that wasn't true just a year ago at all). But 
still,  when comes to a bigger structures and applications (when I 
believe this is what flex is about) more objects to deal with, standard 
prototype seems to be more efficient. And here is a little example of 
the very nature of this problem:


We don't know what future will bring, maybe they will go crazy and 
built-in jQuery interpreter in their browsers, or do more crazy things...
I am not saying that current output is wrong, but did you consider 
different styles? Or at least have a choice to spit out a code in the 
way you can configure, specify some rules of AST?. Take a look at HaXe 
output for instance.

I don't care if the output code is ugly and messy. What I do care about, 
is that this very code is the best performer. I am writing AS3/Flex code 
for clarity and speed of production, and what I expect is the best 
performance on the other side. No more slow downs and bloated stuff. 
Because it will only tell people, pick one of the native JS framework if 
you need to develop RIA application for HTML5. The last thing Flex need 
is reputation of over-bloated stuff on the future platform of the web. 
Do this the best way, or do this well enough otherwise don't do it at all.

>> 2. adobe.extend / adobe.classes? shouldn't be apache?
> Well, it shouldn't be "adobe", but I'm not sure what we should change it to.

If apache sounds too general maybe just flex? Keep in mind that 
apache.flex.classes will destroy performance a bit, yeap that's what JS 
is about, shallow water ;)


View raw message