With all due respect Gary, I just finished making a project management application for a client that is pure HTML/JS and runs on all browsers. The application looks like the latest version of office, that is, it looks like a clean, modern and power desktop application, and functions like one, in pure HTML/JS. Has a full blown chat server and client (again, pure JS), etc so on and so forth. People that still believe the flash VM can do things that HTML/JS can't are out of touch (again, not trying to be offensive). As far as animation/games etc, just look at projects like pixijs[1], or away3D typescript (now awayJS)[2].
I also disagree that the value of flex "is an extension of Flash". I believe that's actually it's curse. Whatever the reasons are don't matter: flash is viewed by the public as the past, with pure HTML/JS being the future. That is the global mentality, and we're not going to change it. Absolutely everyone is focusing on app/UI frameworks written to target pure JS/HTML. Look at Joa Ebert, probably flash's most brilliant user and non-adobe evangelist, abandoned flash very publicly and angrily years ago, and is developing, like everyone else, pure JS/HTML app frameworks. I agree that FlexJS is probably where the "future" focus should be because indeed, flex is a powerful UI framework and being able to target JS would put this project at least high up there on the list of tools to use for "future proof" development. [1]http://www.pixijs.com/ [2]http://typescript.away3d.com/ On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:05 PM, Gary Yang <flashflex...@gmail.com> wrote: > I do not think it is possible to implement even near features to current > Flash based Flex, There is a FlexJS project there, let the developers tell > their story, > > What is Flex? Why people use it? > > People use Flex when working on real complex UI that CAN NOT BE implemented > with Javascript! > The value of Flex is an extension of Flash, there are too many Javascript > based frameworks already! > > > On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Nicholas Kwiatkowski <nicho...@spoon.as> > wrote: > > > Just to be clear -- there is no AS4. Adobe proposed the standard and > > started some work on it and then didn't proceed with it any further. > > > > I don't think we need to set a goal of a complete re-write to read a 5.0 > > milestone. I think working on some of the bigger concepts of decoupling > > some of the components to make them ready or at least more portable to > > FlexJS is a goal we can set. Setting the bar too high I think will make > it > > unattainable. > > > > -Nick > > > > On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 3:43 PM, <f...@dfguy.us> wrote: > > > > > I think it's a touchy subject. The flash player and adobe always seem > to > > > get a bunch of flack, often unlike most other similar platforms. This > > whole > > > "proprietary" phrase is usually used as some sort of bludgeon meaning > > > intrinsically bad; which it obviously is not. But it's a difficult > > > situation though like mentioned where you have to depend on a company > for > > > support and there's a lot of uncertainty there. > > > > > > So either rewrite the platform to use a new AS4 or rewrite to use a > > > different runtime like just JavaScript in the browser, you're still > > doing a > > > lot of rewriting. Then, the browser isn't exactly a runtime in terms of > > > being interpretive as opposed to precompiled. So if you target the > > browser > > > you still have to figure out some "third party" framework for mobile > > > deployment in app form right? > > > > > > What I'd like to see is the ability to something like JavaScript as an > > > option but then to actually continue to have a super charged runtime to > > > target that's actually supported to the fullest. I don't know if it's > > > really Adobe's fault regarding the plight of flash player or if it > really > > > just boils down to outside forces screwing things up in one way or > > another. > > > > > > If flex became a JavaScript only framework for targeting would that > > > actually help it get used more, or would there be even more > competition. > > I > > > think what might be better would to be to have a strong runtime > supported > > > by a "proprietary" company properly, and then also enable to use of > open > > > standards, html5, JavaScript etc within the framework itself so that > you > > > could reuse a lot of the web standards code that's out there. > > > > > > David > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Jesse Nicholson <ascensionsyst...@gmail.com> > > > To: dev@flex.apache.org > > > Sent: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 1:44 PM > > > Subject: Re: Let's talk about Flex 5 > > > > > > My 2 cents is that the project should be focusing on moving away from a > > > third-party, proprietary and frankly dead platform. I'm also not sure > > what > > > actionscript 4 has to do with anything, it's not like there will be a > > > ground-up rewrite of the entire project to port it to a new language. > > Even > > > a mass, automated conversion (were it possible) would be, in purpose, > > > purely for the benefit of yet again, maintaining compatability with a > > > third-party, proprietary platform. In fact it would be worse than that, > > it > > > would bind the project specifically to that third-party, closed source > > > target runtime. It's discussions like this that are at the root of the > > > previous concerns I've raised which can be summarized as such: is flex > > it's > > > own product, or is everyone just working for adobe. > > > > > > I know it's a lot of work, but I really think we need to replace AIR > and > > > Flash Player as the target for this project. Doing so would create a > > truly > > > standalone, apache driven product future-proof, omni-platform > application > > > development. I didn't want to really get into this discussion yet but, > > > since it came up... > > > > > > As for the question of AIR on iOS, Adobe created a LLVM frontend to > > convert > > > actionscript to LLVM-IR, which adds all of the benefits of LLVM for > > > optimization, then emits ARM. The runtime (which is probably C++ > source, > > > since the entire Tamarin engine is C++) is precompiled already to AMR > > libs, > > > linkin is done, etc etc, lots of proprietary magic and you've got an > > final, > > > native assembly. This is called AOT or ahead of time compilation, > rather > > > than using JIT (as the flash player uses) in order to comply with > > anti-jit > > > license terms of IOS development. > > > > > > The AVM2 is (mostly) open source under the Mozilla Public License, but > > has > > > recently gone missing from mozillas mercurial repos. It's tough to > track > > > down, but you can still find "tamarin-redux" and get a zip of the > source > > > tree. I believe the AOT compiler source code is present as well. > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Gary Yang <flashflex...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > just to bring this up... > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 1:45 PM, Gary Yang <flashflex...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Java Spring is a very good example for framework evolving, for > Flex, > > I > > > > > think it is the similar situation: > > > > > > > > > > The key function is > > > > > 1) Mxml > > > > > 2)Binding > > > > > 3)Data structure such as IList implementations > > > > > > > > > > on top of Mxml/Binding/Data is 1) UIComponent 2) Skinning 3)network > > > > > components > > > > > > > > > > and then osmf, reporting, text .... > > > > > > > > > > I think from Flex5, we should modularize these into different kinds > > of > > > > > projects: > > > > > > > > > > 1) Flex data, to provide an infrastructure for 1) mxml -> as > > > generation, > > > > > 2) reactive programming(Binding); 3) related data structures; > > > > > > > > > > 2) Based on Flex data, Flex UI, to provide the basic UI > > implementation( > > > > in > > > > > Flex4 skinning way ), could be multi projects. > > > > > > > > > > 3) Based on Flex data, Network/Native components, http, websocket > and > > > > peer > > > > > to peer, native devices communications. > > > > > > > > > > and then projects that specified in different fields: video, text, > > > > > reporting .... > > > > > > > > > > I see Flex as a tool sets to solve complex user interface, so Flash > > > > player > > > > > is the only way to work in desktop web, so the language has to > > express > > > at > > > > > least as much as AS3, so if possible, using Java as a language will > > be > > > > > enough to downgrade into most other languages. > > > > > > > > > > Just a little thought. > > > > > > > > > > -Gary > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 8:06 AM, <f...@dfguy.us> wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Right, it could be written in it and not cross compiled. It could > be > > > > that > > > > >> the project is what get cross compiled and then packaged with the > > > > runtime. > > > > >> I think though that this could be a good opportunity to improve > the > > > > runtime > > > > >> in general as was previously talked about with the AS4 plans but I > > > guess > > > > >> we'll have to wait and continue to ask Adobe to work on it. > > > > >> > > > > >> David > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > > > >> From: Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> > > > > >> To: dev@flex.apache.org > > > > >> Sent: Thu, 05 Jun 2014 6:56 AM > > > > >> Subject: Re: Let's talk about Flex 5 > > > > >> > > > > >> I don’t think that’s correct. Unless I’m mistaken, the AIR iOS > > runtime > > > > is > > > > >> written in Objective C from the get-go. (Although it might be > > written > > > in > > > > >> C++. Dunno…) > > > > >> > > > > >> Whether or not it makes sense to rewrite the AIR iOS runtime in > > Swift > > > is > > > > >> an entirely different question — which probably only the engineers > > at > > > > Adobe > > > > >> could really answer… > > > > >> > > > > >> On Jun 5, 2014, at 2:51 PM, f...@dfguy.us wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> > My understanding is that the entire runtime gets cross compiled > > into > > > > >> objective c. So Adobe would have to rewrite this to use swift, > but I > > > > think > > > > >> the same process would basically be used. It's possible though > that > > > > swift > > > > >> could enable additional features. The limitation on loading > compiled > > > > byte > > > > >> code is purely just a licensing and not a technical limitation > that > > > > imposed > > > > >> by Apple. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > David > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > > > >> > From: Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> > > > > >> > To: dev@flex.apache.org > > > > >> > Sent: Thu, 05 Jun 2014 1:17 AM > > > > >> > Subject: Re: Let's talk about Flex 5 > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Really? The only way I know of outputting ActionScript for iOS > is > > > > using > > > > >> AIR for iOS which is just a swf with an embedded runtime. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > On Jun 5, 2014, at 4:26 AM, f...@dfguy.us wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > >> >> There's already the ability to cross compile to objective c for > > iOS > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Jesse Nicholson > > > > > > -- Jesse Nicholson
