Digging even deeper into Falcon I think that some parts need some cleaning up more and more.
Having a look at the commit comments of the parts I'm talking about indicate that noone here has been doing any work on them at all (Still have the initial donation commit comment). It seems that we have some SWF and some SWC parts Would there be any objection to create a "Flash" part which SWC and SWF could extend? For example the SWFWriterAndSizeReporter doesn't write anything except the size report. So I would like to change this to a FlashSizeReporter and have it use a IFlashWriterFactory interface which is extended by a ISWCWriterFactory and a ISWFWriterFactory and this way sort of separate the tangled up bits of code. Another question: Should I really discuss this sort of stuff here? I think I could be producing quite a bit of mails ... don't want to bore you guys not interested in this ;-) Chris ________________________________________ Von: Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 30. Oktober 2014 15:48 An: dev@flex.apache.org Betreff: Working on Falcon Hi, today I started working on fixing some of the issues I found in falcon. I started with first steps in adding advanced telemetry to Falcon. As far as I remember the advanced-telemetry option is only available for SWF output. On my way I noticed that the org.apache.flex.swc.io package contains a ISWFWriterFactory and there is no ISWCWriterFactory. I would have expected the ISWFWriterFactory to at least be in org.apache.flex.swf.io. As I wanted to extend only the SWF output I moved the ISWFWriterFactory to swf.io and created a new ISWCWriterFactory in swc.io. Unfortunately there seems to be a little mixture of SWC and SWF classes called (The SWFWriterAndSizeReporter? is called in the SWC code for example). Would it be a good idea to clean things up here or is there a reason for this being the way it is? Chris
