Mailing-List: contact flex-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283)
Subject: Re: Flex 5 in haxe
From: Justin Mclean <justin@classsoftware.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CADPmPauMdRSGO7BQaHfC_w4q=wO4kyk_HT42XoM+g66rR_8zrA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2012 00:17:46 +1100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2AF11B3E-2586-4973-9030-A225C35F0879@classsoftware.com>
References: 
 <CAMFKFRjVqyYP6+NV+-nw_YDc_UNTDeWnUg-AYZvnkhk4o7Q7uw@mail.gmail.com>
 <813661353067194@web29g.yandex.ru>
 <CAGw=_tzy_BGV9vFZNFR0x04t7yeQkReVSE1RHM5BYEM4KwctfQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADPmPauMdRSGO7BQaHfC_w4q=wO4kyk_HT42XoM+g66rR_8zrA@mail.gmail.com>
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org

Hi,

> I've said it before it is a really great idea to write Flex in a =
language
> that can be compiled to other platforms. Haxe is a great language that
> lives to its promise.
I only know a little about Haxe. Could you comment on what would be =
required (in terms of skills and effort) to port Flex to Haxe? I know =
it's ActionScript like but is missing a few features that Flex may be =
using? Other than compiling to multiple targets does it have any other =
significant advantages? Any idea if there are likely to be major =
performance issues due to the fact that Flex is reasonably complex and =
designed for the Flash VM?

> Going with Actionscript now would be a problem as it
> won't be long until the next Actionscript will come out and then Flex =
5
> would have to be written again.
Currently I see no compelling reason to move to the new VM when it comes =
out. Once we know more about it that may change but it sounds like it =
wont be compatible with AS3. The existing one for the moment works and =
is likely to be around for many many years.

> I wonder how large the next Flash player would be in terms of file =
size.=20
Bigger but not significantly so I would guess (1.5x current size at =
most?). Again don't really see this as an issue for not using it.

Thanks,
Justin