On 11/28/12 10:35 AM, "Daniel Wasilewski" <devudes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What I have noticed up there as well, this project not only have JS bits
> implemented to mimic flash player, but Action Script bits as well with
> lots of missing features.
> I see the point behind this idea, and the guys were trying to find a
> common ground between both platforms. But ended up rewriting code for
> both platforms.
>
> I am not sure this is what we need, don't we? I saw potential behind
> FalconJS to at least make this heavy lifting on AST level as the common
> ground. Otherwise will go back to project I am doing, which is pretty
> much jangaroo approach as well, but philosophy and implementation behind
> it differ.
I'm not sure what project you are referring to, but at this time, we're at
such an early stage, I would encourage folks to try different angles. I
have mine and am eager to have folks help shape it, but that doesn't mean
other approaches should not be explored.
> Dan
>
> On 11/28/2012 6:09 PM, Kevin Newman wrote:
>> Anyway, a lot of the current popular plan seems to revolve around
>> doing direct bindings from Flex into JS/DOM objects and not using a
>> Flash layer at all, so it does seem like it may not be needed. Still,
>> it seems like an option, and there is useful core items in there, like
>> BitmapData, etc. that are already implemented.
>>
>> Maybe the legal overhead outweighs the benefits of an already
>> completed code base?
>>
>> Kevin N.
>>
>>
>> On 11/28/12 12:47 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>>> I don't think we need it. But if folks want to try, they need to
>>> make sure
>>> it is legally ok with Apache if we do so.
>>
>
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
