I think this syntax is just sugar for more verbose function calls like
trace(foo.children("is"))
but the terse syntax is much nicer.
- Gordon
Sent from my iPad
> On Jul 4, 2014, at 12:22 AM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
> There are functions, but I've seen significant use of XML as an "Object".
> IMO it is what makes e4x possible: the dot-path lookup as below:
>
> Var foo:XML = <this><is><a name="test" /></is></this>
>
>
> Trace(foo.is);
> Trace(foo..a(@name=="test"));
> Trace(foo..test);
>
> But I could be wrong and there is some other way to handle this.
>
> -Alex
>
>> On 7/3/14 12:51 PM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Why does it need setter/getter? E4X is all functions isn't it?
>>
>> Yeah. JSON is generally a better way to go, but some APIs are still XML
>> and then there's manipulation of XML documents (which I tend to do a lot
>> of...)
>>
>>> On Jul 3, 2014, at 7:53 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I took a quick look a while back. Required getter/setter support in the
>>> browser. And then the remaining question: will it perform? It is
>>> similar
>>> to the AMF question. Doable, but may not be faster than switching to
>>> JSON.
>>>
>>> -Alex
>>>
>>>> On 7/3/14 9:48 AM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Has anyone looked into writing a js library to copy the functionality
>>>> of
>>>> E4X?
>>>>
>>>> It seems to me that at least 90% of E4X could be pretty easily
>>>> replicated
>>>> in a js libraryŠ
>>>>
>>>> Besides namespaces, the only thing that seems hard to me is complex
>>>> selectors.
>>>>
>>>>> On Jul 2, 2014, at 7:53 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> FWIW, FlexJS is eventually going to need to find a way to warn folks
>>>>> about
>>>>> use of E4X
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
