Mailing-List: contact dev-help@flex.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@flex.apache.org
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 00:18:24 -0800 (PST)
From: yishayw <yishayjobs@hotmail.com>
To: dev@flex.apache.org
Message-ID: <1487751504904-59747.post@n4.nabble.com>
In-Reply-To: <D4D27F09.85A03%aharui@adobe.com>
References: <19AA6022-08BC-4EA4-8879-216570417C0B@gmail.com> <D4D1FA0F.20F10%pent@adobe.com> <CAMFKFRiit2JDQQR9A_OP=PK+aiQx-y0rTZx=VPkin7VTYq_hVw@mail.gmail.com> <D4D20DB5.20F21%pent@adobe.com> <D4D27F09.85A03%aharui@adobe.com>
Subject: Re: [FlexJS]Layout redux
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
archived-at: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 08:23:27 -0000

Alex Harui wrote
> For sure, we need to the the JS side right and then worry about the SWF
> side.  I think there are way fewer behavior issues on the SWF side to deal
> with.

If there are less issues with the SWF side, wouldn't it make sense to try
and emulate the SWF side by using absolute positioning? It would have the
benefit of being easier to maintain, as bugs would probably appear in both
versions and fixed together. There can also be more code reused across
implementations.


--
View this message in context: http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/FlexJS-Layout-redux-tp59725p59747.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.