incubator-flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Charles Monteiro <char...@nycsmalltalk.org>
Subject RE: To AS4 or not
Date Mon, 22 Oct 2012 11:12:56 GMT
Accessibility as for the disabled, physically impaired ? No, I don't see
that as a hard requirement to start work on a port but something you would
try to add later when it becomes available.

The unclear implications of whether my flex as3 mobile app has a path
forward  in this new context of as4 is a huge concern. Knowing that some AS
gurus are working on a port would be great.
On Oct 20, 2012 11:48 PM, "Gordon Smith" <gosmith@adobe.com> wrote:

> Isn't it premature to port the Flex framework if the new runtime doesn't
> support things like accessibility that RIAs need?
>
> - Gordon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tianzhen Lin [mailto:tangent@usa.net]
> Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 2:10 PM
> To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: To AS4 or not
>
> I cannot wait to see the specs of AS4, and love to help out porting Flex
> framework from AS3 to AS4.  What would be interesting is to see how to
> maintain the parity between the two versions, but a good technology is
> worth the pain to keep it up to date.
>
> Tangent
>
> ------ Original Message ------
> Received: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 05:02:44 PM EDT
> From: Gordon Smith <gosmith@adobe.com>
> To: "flex-dev@incubator.apache.org" <flex-dev@incubator.apache.org>
> Subject: RE: To AS4 or not
>
> > > Is it a stupide idea to use Falcon to transcode from AS3 to AS4 and
> > > then
> compile AS4 with adobes compiler? (if we emulate or drop the native
> features that disappeared) Is it realistic or a large amount of work to do?
> >
> > It's not a stupid idea, but it is probably less work  to just manually
> > port
> the framework to AS4.
> >
> > > Is it realistic to use falcon to transcode flex codebase from AS3 to
> > > any
> other language, and be able to use this generated code as the new codebase
> for Apache flex?
> > again, features like Events, or Display aside.
> >
> > It is certainly possible. Whether it is realistic, given the lack of
> > people
> volunteering to work on the compiler, is questionable in my mind.
> >
> > - Gordon
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: sébastien Paturel [mailto:sebpatu.flex@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 6:35 AM
> > To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: To AS4 or not
> >
> > Thanks Gordon for you answers,
> >
> > "but you'd have to rewrite it even if the new VM ran AS3 because the
> > new VM
> doesn't have DisplayObject or Event"
> > Such  features can be emulated in short term before rewriting the
> > framework
> without them.
> > But rewrite the whole codebase because of synax changes is much more
> > work to
> get done.
> >
> > Is it a stupide idea to use Falcon to transcode from AS3 to AS4 and
> > then
> compile AS4 with adobes compiler? (if we emulate or drop the native
> features that disappeared) Is it realistic or a large amount of work to do?
> >
> > I know its not good practice to try to code in AS3 for an AS4 vm with
> different patterns, but it can be a short term solution if we need to
> target the new runtime rapidly.
> > If flex is multi target though, we won't be able to get a generic
> > language
> that can fit to every target patterns we want.
> > And with pragmatism in mind, flex is AS3 today, so we have to deal
> > with
> > AS3 for quite a time.
> >
> > Gordon, another question that may be stupid.
> > Is it realistic to use falcon to transcode flex codebase from AS3 to
> > any
> other language, and be able to use this generated code as the new codebase
> for Apache flex?
> > again, features like Events, or Display aside.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Regards,
> >
> >
> > Le 20/10/2012 00:11, Gordon Smith a écrit :
> > >> So the only way to make flex run on the new VM is to rewrite the
> > >> SDK
> code, and with no easy way to do so?
> > > Yes, I think so, but you'd have to rewrite it even if the new VM ran
> > > AS3
> because the new VM doesn't have DisplayObject or Event!
> > >
> > >> Do you know if the next AIR runtime will only work for AS4?
> > > Sorry, I don't know the plans for AIR.
> > >
> > > - Gordon
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: sébastien Paturel [mailto:sebpatu.flex@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 3:02 PM
> > > To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: To AS4 or not
> > >
> > > So the only way to make flex run on the new VM is to rewrite the SDK
> > > code,
> and with no easy way to do so?
> > > Do you know if the next AIR runtime will only work for AS4?
> > >
> > > Le 19/10/2012 23:53, Gordon Smith a écrit :
> > >> I think this would be difficult as the new VM is not designed to
> > >> run
> AS3.
> > >>
> > >> - Gordon
> > >>
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: sébastien Paturel [mailto:sebpatu.flex@gmail.com]
> > >> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 2:50 PM
> > >> To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > >> Subject: Re: To AS4 or not
> > >>
> > >> and using Falcon to compile AS3 to generate new VM bytecode?
> > >> is it more realistic to achieve?
> > >>
> > >> Le 19/10/2012 20:54, Gordon Smith a écrit :
> > >>>> Gordon, Adobe AS4 compiler won't be open sourced but would it be
> possible to adapt Falcon to target the new VM?
> > >>> Yes, it would be possible. Falcon/ASC 2.0 was the starting point
> > >>> for
> Adobe's development of an AS4 compiler. But it's been many developer-years
> of work for us and it isn't trivial. ActionScript is more complex than MXML.
> > >>>
> > >>> - Gordon
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>> From: João Fernandes [mailto:joaopedromartinsfernandes@gmail.com]
> > >>> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 10:53 AM
> > >>> To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > >>> Subject: Re: To AS4 or not (was: Re: ASC 2.0 and Falcon)
> > >>>
> > >>> Alex, couldn't we simply use AS4 and have multiple target platforms
?
> > >>>
> > >>> Gordon, Adobe AS4 compiler won't be open sourced but would it be
> possible to adapt Falcon to target the new VM?
> >
>
>
>

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