On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > OK. Do you think you can build a new example in MXML/AS/FXG? The > skin/view would simply choose a different FXG file for each state. In > theory you should be able to get a working SWF without any Falcon changes, > then I can run that through FalconJX. > > Will do. Although, I am not yet clear how you want the classes to be organized. For ex., for the TextButton, the classes would be:
TextButton.as (has the skin) -> TextButtonSkin.as (has references to) -> TextButtonUpState.fxg, TextButtonDownState.fxg and TextButtonOverState.fxg. On the JS side, it could either be: TextButton.js (has the skin) -> TextButtonSkin.js (has references to) -> TextButtonUpState.svg, TextButtonDownState.svg and TextButtonOverState.svg. (or) TextButton.js (has the skin) -> TextButtonSkin.js (has SVG drawing functions) -> drawUpState(), drawDownState() and drawOverState() Am I on the right track? Thanks, Om > Thanks, > -Alex > > On 3/1/14 12:01 AM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bigosma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >So, if it were up to me, we'd start with a test case where an MXML or AS > > > >> skin points to an fxg file for each state. The Falcon compiler should > >> already generate the right thing for the AS side. Then, we have to > >>apply > >> a similar hook to the FXG compiler that we did to get JS output for > >> FalconJX and start coding up however we want the JS/SVG output to look > >> like. It could call this Graphics component, but may not need to, it > >>may > >> just generate SVG or JS calls. But for sure, you're welcome to write > >>the > >> Graphics class for both AS and JS and teach BarChart to use it. We'll > >> need that no matter what. > >> > > > >I will get working on the Graphics class then. Will try to push something > >soon. > > > > > >> > >> Anyway, if this plan is acceptable to you, what I'd prefer to do is > >>this: > >> I would apply the hooks to the FXG compiler and get it to output > >> "something". I'd point you to the change list so you can see what files > >> need to be modified. Then you can try your hand at modifying those Java > >> source files to get whatever output you want. You really don't have to > >> know much about compilation, you are basically taking a tree structure > >>and > >> converting it to some textual representation. Then we don't have to do > >>as > >> much coordination between the two of us. > >> > > > >This sounds good to me. Please go ahead, add the hooks and let me know! > > > >Thanks, > >Om > >
