Mailing-List: contact flex-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of aharui@adobe.com designates
 64.18.1.25 as permitted sender)
From: Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com>
To: "flex-dev@incubator.apache.org" <flex-dev@incubator.apache.org>
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2012 08:02:39 -0800
Subject: Re: Current compiler question
Thread-Topic: Current compiler question
Thread-Index: Ac3EwdYNIMGao1rsQqq3qc3xXJr1+gAGyGWr
Message-ID: <CCCCF51F.48A7D%aharui@adobe.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAJs+wW0EWi2614sBS2YksvOG9E_4Mtmi2AcS=V4uANafhyXLJg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
user-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/13.13.0.120411
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0


On 11/17/12 4:47 AM, "Erik de Bruin" <erik@ixsoftware.nl> wrote:

> As a complete compiler noob, but can somebody answer this:
>=20
> Can we not build a 'mxmlcJS'? I understand that Falcon was specifically
> designed to have a 'variable backend' that allows for FalconJS to be hook=
ed
> in. Is something like that feasible with the 'previous generation'
> compiler(s)?
>=20
> The advantage would be that we have a fully fledged MXML/AS compiler that
> works with the current framework, so no need to rewrite the framework, no=
r
> invest heavily in finishing the remaining 20% of the Falcon MXML parsing
> and finish FalconJS. We would 'only' have to rewrite the part of the
> compiler that currently outputs 'abc' and the browser side player
> (HTML/CSS/JS) :-)
>=20
> Thoughts?
>=20
In theory, Falcon should also be faster.  And, IMO, the code is cleaner and
has fewer SDK dependencies which will be to our advantage when trying to ge=
t
to other targets.

-=20
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui