I'm not sure there is one right way. Some features are "cross-cutting", some build on other features. The first is done in some languages via multiple inheritance, which AS doesn't support, so utility functions (I would like to see our utility classes broken into utility functions) or even beads with their own strand of child beads is possible. The second lends itself to subclassing.
Another question is whether the smallest bead should carry any overhead to make subclassing easier. My personal opinion is no, but I haven't done any research into how much the cost is for the various options. A volunteer willing to do this will be greatly appreciated, but it may not result in a single answer, maybe just data to advise in certain scenarios. My 2 cents, -Alex On 6/6/17, 10:01 PM, "yishayw" <yishayj...@hotmail.com> wrote: >OmPrakash Muppirala wrote >> Bead A supports feature X >> Bead B needs to support feature X and Y > >Theoretically Bead B could support just feature Y, and the strand would >choose to add both A and B or just A. > > > > >-- >View this message in context: >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapache-fle >x-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com%2FBeads-and-DRY-was-Re-FlexJS-Removing >-PasswordInputBead-has-no-effect-tp62177p62199.html&data=02%7C01%7C%7C0468 >ec58ff8646d727ca08d4ad645e4e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C >636324093992333208&sdata=RI6FcM6UJwls9fw6MzZZwwk%2FFu5JonjiVlTx%2B5diuow%3 >D&reserved=0 >Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
