incubator-flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicholas Kwiatkowski <>
Subject Re: Apache Flex 3.7 - my planned mega-patch
Date Mon, 23 Jan 2012 12:17:32 GMT
I don't know about taking the shotgun approach and making EVERYTHING
private -- but I do have my own list of variables/functions that should be
changed from private to protected.  I wouldn't veto the careful approach of
making the change...


On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 5:48 AM, David Arno <> wrote:

> When we get the source for Flex 3.6, have resolved legal issues, patched
> missing features etc, I'm expecting that we will make a 3.7 release. I'm
> assuming most people would prefer we concentrated on Flex 4 and plans for
> Flex 5, rather than on developing Flex 3 further. To that extent, I plan on
> submitting a Flex 3 patch that can neatly be described as:
> /private/protected/g
> Because of the poor structure of Flex 3, inheritance is the only way to
> create new components. Being unable to override behaviour of the parent
> component causes lots of hacks, copying and pasting of code from
> grandparent
> classes etc. All these issues could be fixed by making everything
> protected.
> As (I assume) we only plan on creating bug fix future releases of Flex 3,
> tying our hands with the extra contractual requirements of protected
> members
> shouldn't be a problem.
> This suggestion applies only to Flex 3. Doing this with Flex 4 would be a
> big mistake IMO. And if we design Flex 5 right, it'll become a complete
> non-issue with that release.
> Before I undertake this work, I want to check that the committers won't
> veto
> it. So I wanted to get people's views on the matter now.
> David.

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message