incubator-flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Schmalle <m...@teotigraphix.com>
Subject Re: Petition: Flash Catalyst must survive
Date Tue, 10 Jan 2012 18:12:52 GMT
Doug,

My reply was based off of not having anything to do with FC and  
Adobe's internal discussions. My opinion was based off of what I hoped  
would change through the process of developing Flex 2 & 3 components.  
It was cumbersome to write components and "skins" in 2 & 3 :)

Mike

> Quoting Doug McCune <doug@dougmccune.com>:
>
>> The saddest thing to me is how much time and effort went into building an
>> entirely new (yet still incomplete) component model (Spark) that was built
>> all around the idea of Catalyst. That's not to say that the Spark
>> architecture doesn't have good ideas when you remove Catalyst from the
>> picture, but the amount of time that went into designing it to work with
>> the Fc tooling was all for naught. I have to believe many decisions would
>> have been made differently, and a lot of time would have been invested
>> differently had the Catalyst tooling support not been the priority.
>>
>> Personally I'm happy to see Catalyst go, and would have been happier to see
>> it go long ago.
>>
>
> Having developed an extensive amount of components in Flex 2 & 3 I  
> will have to disagree that Spark was built "for" or around FC.
>
> Spark was created out of the desire/need to separate the view from  
> the component. Instead of doing everything in updateDisplayList(),  
> skins were introduced so views for each component could be  
> interchanged without having a coupled internal dependency on View  
> logic and rendering in the UIComponent subclass.
>
> I have never used FC in my life, so I saw Spark as alleviating a  
> huge coupling that the developer had to constantly deal with.
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>




Mime
View raw message