Hi Justin, a new flex 5 from scratch concept would not be trying to be compatible backwards. If the task of write a new Flex is huge...make it backwards compatible will be totaly utopic IMHO. So as my last line in my propossal says...we should try to start with something like an experiment, to share with the community and see if it gains traction. I'll go the "coding for fun" way and not trying to go far beyond that line in the first steps. Then things could get more serious...
If we use the same API in flex migration could be somewhat possible, but, again I would not try to put that goal in that project. For that I'm sure that other people in this project would want to maintain and continue the Fx4.x branch. We could event reserve the 5.x number for it...and go Flex 6 with haxe... Regarding haxe-js, I don't know too much since although I know haxe from the very beginning I never did nothing in that technology, so again it would be something to learn and experiment. 2012/11/16 Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> > Hi, > > > Some months ago my thoughts was very different, but right now that a full > > rewrite is required, my opinion is clear about what to choose, and for > > something new, I choose Haxe. > > Can you outline what would be require to convert the existing Flex > framework for use with Haxe? MXML (and binding) would be a stumbling block > no? > > Assuming it was complete? How hard would it be for existing applications > to be converted to use the new framework? > > I'm rather sceptical than even if the Flex framework was converted to Haxe > (via conversion tools or otherwise) and we could target JS that way that it > would be performant. unless someone tried I guess we don't know. > > Out of curiosity have you tried/taken a look at the AS3 to Haxe converter? > http://haxe.org/com/libs/as3hx > > Justin -- Carlos Rovira Director de Tecnología M: +34 607 22 60 05 F: +34 912 35 57 77 http://www.codeoscopic.com http://www.directwriter.es http://www.avant2.es
