No. It was not. If you've ever had the pleasure of using Flex 1.0 or 1.5, well... yeah. They offered the same UI, but that's it. Otherwise it was a complete mess.
-Nick On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 3:24 PM, sébastien Paturel <sebpatu.f...@gmail.com>wrote: > So it means that Flex in AS2 was not flex? > > > Le 15/11/2012 20:50, Alex Harui a écrit : > > >> >> On 11/15/12 11:44 AM, "sébastien Paturel" <sebpatu.f...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Why do you thing that using AS4 is the better choice? >>> It brings me back to the thread (what is the essence of Flex?) In my >>> opinion, flex is not tight to actionscript. >>> >> IMO, Flex is AS3. My assumption is that there are large bodies of AS >> business logic that folks are not wanting to port to something else. Of >> course, that assumption could be incorrect. >> >> >
