On 11/17/12 2:47 AM, "Joan Llenas Masó" <j...@garnetworks.com> wrote:
> I think I'm able to get your point after watching these slides and mixing
> it together with what you mentioned earlier on in another thread.
> So instead of going through direct UI AS3->{MyOutputTargetOfChioce}
> translation we just concentrate our efforts in the business logic code
> translation AS3->{MyOutputTargetOfChioce}.
> The views on the other hand are implemented natively in the language of
> choice, being it AS3, JS or whatever.
> Finally MXML comes to rescue giving us the power of componetization and
> view declaration.
> This way we can implement same set of components for different output
> targets but declare them in the same way.
> FalconJS will take care of the rest.
>
> Am I right? or did I make my own movie...
Believe me, my vision and prototype is not completely thought out. I'm
depending on the rest of the community to help steer and create, but I think
that you have the basic idea that I have in my head.
>
> Anyway, I see maaaaany advantages here. Wow, I love it. This is actually
> the essence of Flex taken to the next level :)
> Well, I see Haxe fitting here as well. Actually we could plug many
> packaging tools in the FlaconJS "output port".
>
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
