Mailing-List: contact dev-help@flex.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@flex.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of harbs.lists@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.212.182 as permitted sender)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=euc-kr
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Subject: Re: New Flex to JS project
From: Harbs <harbs.lists@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CFE2CE17.27962%aharui@adobe.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2014 21:13:31 +0300
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <6509A4D4-49AE-4351-8AAE-FE6FC87A62B5@gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAJs+wW3VM_BO8Q3NYZq_UYHdeVS7=BRvbxZBKGyS9xX8=cdLDA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CFD96E36.270DA%aharui@adobe.com>
 <CAJs+wW2NQ8uPz0dC6oS4P43yRn_17_ff0af1YZeqhpXd4ztK7w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CFD985F3.27120%aharui@adobe.com>
 <CAJs+wW0hAOagdkyrshjEDX9xx2BaDf+p9sbtxnQ-pYkeu-k0ZQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CFD98ED9.2713C%aharui@adobe.com>
 <CAJs+wW0bZfFCSYsAijJHkCFnT4rmedrgjLmSbX9A4Wb76N2fUA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CFDA3D90.271EA%aharui@adobe.com>
 <CAJs+wW3zMoCnh8=QD1K0T9y-Gi3--HS_3HdB2SsFQWHrDWz-VA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CFDABA03.27264%aharui@adobe.com>
 <CAJs+wW0=sYgwKwsu1zf3YXobW3vgWnG8ujgP3jyqYvtUgD-C5Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CFE01723.275DC%aharui@adobe.com>
 <CAJs+wW0PjPrmpO7i0pir623U0orxPB9iRNQte6xjvOfuYRVtqw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CFE16235.2774F%aharui@adobe.com>
 <CAJs+wW2L5v-o8=t_43JfwHZKu_GBEO7Opqgfwgi_c2r8w2mWjA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CFE29945.278DE%aharui@adobe.com>
 <B4897411-D449-4A41-AD2C-3CBD7B46A677@gmail.com>
 <CFE2B9F7.27935%aharui@adobe.com>
 <71B64798-371A-49C2-8701-362959BFFECE@gmail.com>
 <498B603D-ABDB-4CFD-ADC5-4C1657CB9C00@gmail.com>
 <CFE2CE17.27962%aharui@adobe.com>
To: dev@flex.apache.org

Hmm.

I might have been misunderstanding you.

I thought you were discussing getting FlexJS with mxml markup, data =
binding and everything else to work with Angular. That=A1=AFs what I =
don=A1=AFt see as a fit.

If you mean to simply write Angular applications in AS instead of JS and =
cross-compile using FalconJX, then yes, that should (probably) work. =
Besides TypeScript, you can also use CoffeeScript as well as Angular =
Dart.

I can see an argument to write Angular in AS, but that is just utilizing =
the compiler, rather than the FlexJS framework as a whole. I also don=A1=AF=
t think that it makes sense to create an ActionScript compile target for =
Angular apps.

Harbs

On Jul 9, 2014, at 8:48 PM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:

> OK, I'll try to find time to read up on Angular.  It does appear that
> TypeScript works with Angular.  My rudimentary understanding of this =
stuff
> says that if you can use TS you should be able to use AS as well, but =
I
> could certainly be wrong.
>=20
> -Alex
>=20
> On 7/9/14 10:43 AM, "Harbs" <harbs.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
>=20
>> FWIW, here=A1=AFs some Angular-compatible components:
>> http://angular-ui.github.io/
>> http://angular-ui.github.io/bootstrap/
>> http://angular-ui.github.io/ng-grid/
>>=20
>> and a whole site dedicated to cataloging Angular modules (some of it =
UI,
>> and some of it business logic):
>> http://ngmodules.org/
>>=20
>> As you can see, except for the basic HTML elements, any UI that is =
used
>> with Angular is going to be external modules from either existing UI
>> frameworks (i.e. Bootstrap), or ones built specifically for Angular. =
None
>> of these are part of the core Angular framework.
>>=20
>> I do think that for FlexJS to be successful, we would need some kind =
of
>> public catalog of external modules (components) similar to the =
ngmodules
>> site.
>>=20
>> On Jul 9, 2014, at 8:11 PM, Harbs <harbs.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
>>=20
>>> Angular is not really components. It=A1=AFs more the glue that holds =
the
>>> components together.
>>>=20
>>> Basically, the selling point of Angular is how it binds javascript =
to
>>> HTML. Building custom Angular components is the hardest part of =
using
>>> the framework (and for the most part is not part of the framework
>>> itself). They call them =A1=B0directives=A1=B1 and they have very =
unintuitive json
>>> markup that goes with the js code.
>>>=20
>>> Angular pretty strongly prescribes how the app is put together and =
it=A1=AFs
>>> comprised of HTML template and directive files which comprise the =
view,
>>> and controller/factory/service files which comprise the model and
>>> controller.
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> On Jul 9, 2014, at 7:44 PM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>> On 7/9/14 9:16 AM, "Harbs" <harbs.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>=20
>>>>> I wouldn=A9=F6t call myself an expert on the subject, but I have =
had the
>>>>> opportunity to familiarize myself with both Angular and Create.js =
the
>>>>> past half year.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> Create.js makes sense to integrate into FlexJS. I=A9=F6m not sure =
I
>>>>> understand
>>>>> how Angular would/could be integrated. It seems to me that Angular =
is
>>>>> a
>>>>> competing framework and I don=A9=F6t understand how the two could =
work
>>>>> together.
>>>> IMO, most JS frameworks offer a set of components that you glue
>>>> together
>>>> with JS.  I'm not an expert on these frameworks, but I think =
Angular is
>>>> one of them.  Assuming the JS framework is not buggy, I think there =
is
>>>> a
>>>> lot of pain in writing and debugging the JS code that glues the
>>>> components
>>>> together (the rest of the pain is probably in browser-specific =
issues).
>>>> TypeScript seems to have reached the same conclusion and offers a =
new
>>>> language to do the gluing.  I'd say Dart and GWT also have the same
>>>> thoughts.
>>>>=20
>>>> FlexJS has the potential to be on-par or better as a way to do the
>>>> gluing.
>>>> We have IDEs, we have runtime verification, and we have declarative
>>>> markup in MXML.
>>>>=20
>>>> Think of it this way.  If IKEA or other assemble-it-yourself =
furniture
>>>> makers shipped you a box of pieces cut to size and then just nails =
and
>>>> screws and pre-drilled holes, you'd make a lot of mistakes building =
the
>>>> furniture.  Instead, these manufacturers use special connectors =
making
>>>> it
>>>> much more clear what goes where and making it impossible to make
>>>> certain
>>>> kinds of errors.
>>>>=20
>>>> IMO, classes are those special connectors.  JS is just nails and
>>>> screws.
>>>> In JS, you can attach anything to anything and won't find out until
>>>> much
>>>> later.  In FlexJS, we can offer both better connectors and a =
schematic
>>>> diagram (MXML).
>>>>=20
>>>> -Alex
>>>>=20
>>>>>=20
>>>>> On Jul 9, 2014, at 5:28 PM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>>=20
>>>>>> I hope to attract Jquery, Angular,
>>>>>> CreateJS experts and fans to build out these frameworks and =
making
>>>>>> them
>>>>>> wade through the current SDK would probably be an inhibitor to =
them.
>>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>=20
>>=20
>=20