Created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-33810
-Message d'origine-
De : Maurice Amsellem [mailto:maurice.amsel...@systar.com]
Envoyé : vendredi 11 octobre 2013 00:43
À : dev@flex.apache.org
Objet : RE: describeType still used in many places in SDK
Thnaks for the
Thnaks for the info.
-Message d'origine-
De : Justin Mclean [mailto:jus...@classsoftware.com]
Envoyé : jeudi 10 octobre 2013 23:28
À : dev@flex.apache.org
Objet : Re: describeType still used in many places in SDK
Hi,
I know datagrid use objectUtil describeType and caches th
Hi,
I know datagrid use objectUtil describeType and caches the XML structures to
work out the columns. May need to be careful around that.
Thanks,
Justin
scribeType still used in many places in SDK
On 10/10/13 12:31 PM, "Maurice Amsellem"
wrote:
>Yes, I am just calling describeType vs decribeTypeJSON.
>
>JSON is returning an unstructured object with the following props:
>isDynamic: Bool
>isFinal: bool
>isStatic: bool
>
On 10/10/13 12:31 PM, "Maurice Amsellem"
wrote:
>Yes, I am just calling describeType vs decribeTypeJSON.
>
>JSON is returning an unstructured object with the following props:
>isDynamic: Bool
>isFinal: bool
>isStatic: bool
>name: String
>traits
> accessors: Array of unstructured Objects .
> b
nvoyé : jeudi 10 octobre 2013 20:58
À : dev@flex.apache.org
Objet : Re: describeType still used in many places in SDK
Sounds like it is worth doing, but let's discuss at the next level of detail.
What was the test, just the call to describeType vs describeTypeJSON?
IIRC, the XML format is such th
quivalent with former
>describeType.
>
>So it could be even better if you only need some of the reflection info...
>
>Maurice
>
>-Message d'origine-
>De : Maurice Amsellem [mailto:maurice.amsel...@systar.com]
>Envoyé : jeudi 10 octobre 2013 20:37
>À : dev@
>If so, we can still extend our support.
>
>Tangent
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Maurice Amsellem [mailto:maurice.amsel...@systar.com]
>Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 2:37 PM
>To: dev@flex.apache.org
>Subject: RE: describeType still used in many places in SDK
>
nd our support.
>
>Tangent
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Maurice Amsellem [mailto:maurice.amsel...@systar.com]
>Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 2:37 PM
>To: dev@flex.apache.org
>Subject: RE: describeType still used in many places in SDK
>
>(EDITED: added new lines):
>
From: Maurice Amsellem [mailto:maurice.amsel...@systar.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 2:37 PM
To: dev@flex.apache.org
Subject: RE: describeType still used in many places in SDK
(EDITED: added new lines):
I just did some benchmarks on UI and non UI classes (run several times each
test, the result
ly on UI classes reflection.
WDYT?
Maurice
-Message d'origine-
De : Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com] Envoyé : jeudi 10 octobre 2013 19:49
À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet : Re: describeType still used in many places in
SDK
I wouldn't bother.
On 10/10/13 10:44 AM, "Maur
classes reflection.
WDYT?
Maurice
-Message d'origine-
De : Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com] Envoyé : jeudi 10 octobre 2013 19:49
À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet : Re: describeType still used in many places in
SDK
I wouldn't bother.
On 10/10/13 10:44 AM, "Maurice Amsellem&
-Message d'origine-
De : Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com]
Envoyé : jeudi 10 octobre 2013 19:49
À : dev@flex.apache.org
Objet : Re: describeType still used in many places in SDK
I wouldn't bother.
On 10/10/13 10:44 AM, "Maurice Amsellem"
wrote:
>That may sound li
gt;De : Michael A. Labriola [mailto:labri...@digitalprimates.net]
>Envoyé : jeudi 10 octobre 2013 19:14
>À : dev@flex.apache.org
>Objet : RE: describeType still used in many places in SDK
>
>>Before we switch to it, we have to be absolutely sure of when it was
>>first supported.
: dev@flex.apache.org
Objet : RE: describeType still used in many places in SDK
>Before we switch to it, we have to be absolutely sure of when it was first
>supported. I wouldn't want to break our Flash version compatibility range.
>But otherwise, I have no objections if you want to switch
>Before we switch to it, we have to be absolutely sure of when it was first
>supported. I wouldn't want to break our Flash version compatibility range.
>But otherwise, I have no objections if you want to switch to it.
If it helps, in my code, I am checking for FP10.1 or higher which is when I
>Before we switch to it, we have to be absolutely sure of when it was first
>supported. I wouldn't want to break our Flash version compatibility range.
>But otherwise, I have no objections if you want to switch to it.
Internally describeType now calls describeTypeJSON and then serializes the
dobe.com]
Envoyé : jeudi 10 octobre 2013 18:23
À : dev@flex.apache.org
Objet : Re: describeType still used in many places in SDK
Before we switch to it, we have to be absolutely sure of when it was first
supported. I wouldn't want to break our Flash version compatibility range.
But otherwise,
#x27;origine-
>De : Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com]
>Envoyé : jeudi 10 octobre 2013 17:55
>À : dev@flex.apache.org
>Objet : Re: describeType still used in many places in SDK
>
>
>
>On 10/10/13 7:25 AM, "Maurice Amsellem"
>wrote:
>
>&
: dev@flex.apache.org
Objet : Re: describeType still used in many places in SDK
On 10/10/13 7:25 AM, "Maurice Amsellem"
wrote:
>Hi,
>
>While digging into MXML binding code, I discovered it was using
>DescribeTypeCache class, which is still relying on the old
>d
On 10/10/13 7:25 AM, "Maurice Amsellem"
wrote:
>Hi,
>
>While digging into MXML binding code, I discovered it was using
>DescribeTypeCache class, which is still relying on the old describeType()
>XML instead of the new describeTypeJSON()
>
>Hopefully, it's only called in some specific binding si
Hi,
While digging into MXML binding code, I discovered it was using
DescribeTypeCache class, which is still relying on the old describeType() XML
instead of the new describeTypeJSON()
Hopefully, it's only called in some specific binding situations, such as using
a Binding expression on non-bin
22 matches
Mail list logo
