sounds sensible...
On 6 February 2012 06:45, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> There were some discussions recently about adding an automatic footer
> to all Flex mailing list messages.
>
> I suggest adding just this:
>
> --
> See http://incubator.apache.org/flex/mailing-lists.html for infor
You can always just use a custom namespace to acieve overloading. e.g.
namespace addString;
namespace addNumber;
addString function Sum(a:String,b:String):String
{
return a+b;
}
addNumber function Sum(a:Number,b:Number):Number
{
return a+b;
}
On 16 January 2012 15:33, Rui Silva wrote:
>
> > F
Ah focus too. That does pretty much destroy any accessibility, we'd have to
be very careful as reputationally poor support for accessibility would be
bad (as we've seen historically)
On 15 January 2012 07:05, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>
>
> On 1/14/12 1:55 AM, "Matthew P
rs/designers that do feel they have
> multiple logo designs.
>
>
> Mike
>
> Quoting Matthew Poole :
>
> Cool.
>>
>> On 14 Jan 2012 13:08, "Michael Schmalle" wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>>
>>> """
>>>
te the rules say "design" not logo. What you are worried about is not an
> issue.
>
> AIt has also been stated that the url that was submitted is the design
> being voted on even if designers make newer versions, they need to update
> the original submission url.
>
>
Incidentally, many of the logos on the submissions page have multiple
variations. How would the voters know the are voting for the
same variation of a specific logo?
Might not be important, but perhaps we should have stipulated that the
entrants provide one variation only per submission, but allow
>> Such a thing is possible, although there may be issues around
accessibility
are you thinking screen readers or something else?
On 13 January 2012 00:42, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>
>
> On 1/12/12 1:26 AM, "Arnoud Bos" wrote:
>
> > So i tend to think that Adobe dropped flex for this reason too (the
added link from my blog...
On 13 January 2012 09:07, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Jeffry Houser
> wrote:
> >
> > I went and created an Apache Flex Page on Facebook:
> >
> > http://www.facebook.com/pages/ApacheFlex/174249699342648
>
> Could you add a prominent li
Perhaps the PPMC could select a short list and the community can vote from
within there
That way the community has a voice, but it will not be fully about who has
the biggest twitter following.
On 13 January 2012 14:43, Skogen, Espen wrote:
> Agree
>
>
> Espen Skogen | Vice President | IB Tech
On 13 Jan 2012, at 11:36, Matthew Poole wrote:
>
> ...but still have dependences on the runtime fom Adobe.
>>
>> That would make project management significantly more complex.
>>
>> On 13 January 2012 11:31, Matthew Poole wrote:
>>
>
> We wouldn'
...though we'd then be beholden to Nicolas and his community for updates to
the HaXe compiler, but still have dependences on the runtime fom Adobe.
That would make project management significantly more complex.
On 13 January 2012 11:31, Matthew Poole wrote:
> >> This could be a c
>> This could be a crazy idea, but how about us moving to Haxe?
Love the leftfield thinking Tink. It would be worth serious consideration
IMO if Falcon JS turns out to be a no-go.
2012/1/13 Frédéric Thomas
> From: David Arno
>> Sent: Friday, January 13, 2012 11:14 AM
>>
>
> The advantages that
>> but I'm still confused the intent of the rule
This will be reagrding the cost of printing in any more than two colours,
we'd need to establilsh that it looks good under these circumstances.
fairly standard.
I really like the improvements. Tinks suggestions are good (though with the
broken X you
I woudnt say it's voting so much as suggesting preference. You are
absolutely right the final vote will be the one that counts.
On 12 January 2012 16:28, Leif Wells wrote:
> All,
>
> I am a bit concerned about seeing people vote on specific logos. I am
> wondering if this is appropriate.
>
> I w
:) we're just trying out the "+1" keys in the absense of anything more
significant to vote on.
On 12 January 2012 14:29, Michael Schmalle wrote:
> Quoting Bertrand Delacretaz :
>
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 3:15 PM, Rui Silva wrote:
>>
>>> ...Just a question, should all blog posts be voted here
Perhaps mention that there is no user list a the mo as discussed in the
other thread?
On 12 January 2012 13:58, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Peter Elst wrote:
> > ...As per Bertrand's proposal I have a post I'd like to publish on the
> blog,...
>
> Looks good to
>> I'd just tone down the Apache word a bit
It certainly doesnt work for the smaller log sizes. the font becomes
blurred.
On 12 January 2012 13:22, Rui Silva wrote:
> MAtt wrote:
>
> > I like this one a lot. I dont think its significantly close to any of
> the
> > other logos to cause issue (not
+1 (non member)
On 12 January 2012 13:38, Peter Elst wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> As per Bertrand's proposal I have a post I'd like to publish on the blog,
> see below. Setting up a vote with 24 hour lazy consensus "if no one opposes
> within 24 hours I'll post this" (or as soon as I get my blog ac
; On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Matthew Poole >wrote:
>
> > Perhaps we should review the situation. If the dev list becomes the
> defacto
> > users list before the first release then we will still end up with the
> "are
> > we there yet" questions in t
>> why do you absolutely have to have equivalency with Java
I agree we shouldnt use any other language as a benchmark. ActionScript is
flexible where Java is not in many cases. We shouldnt risk loosingf
expressiveness for the sake of equivalent language features.
I do agree strongly that we should
I like this one a lot. I dont think its significantly close to any of the
other logos to cause issue (not that Im a brand lawyer!).
Matt
On 12 January 2012 11:12, Denis Kristianto wrote:
> @paul
> wow, I really do not know about it. I first saw the logo of the bank. thank
> you for the informati
Perhaps we should review the situation. If the dev list becomes the defacto
users list before the first release then we will still end up with the "are
we there yet" questions in the wrong forum.
We are not seeing that yet so we could defer the decision. On the flip side
we could accept that users
Maybe not with mxmlc, but falcon has lots of grunt.
On 11 January 2012 21:42, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>
>
> On 1/11/12 12:57 PM, "Matthew Poole" wrote:
>
> > preprossessing meta data sounds great, especially for DI etc
> Just remember that preprocessing slows d
preprossessing meta data sounds great, especially for DI etc
Parametric polymorophism would be pretty cool too, it would allow for much
more generic abstractions...
On 11 January 2012 19:00, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>
>
> On 1/11/12 2:38 AM, "Dirk Eismann" wrote:
>
> >
> > I think I saw some JIRA i
>>I think the existing community driven places where folks ask questions
and exchange their knowledge already work.
+1 to that
On 11 January 2012 10:13, Dirk Eismann wrote:
> > Apart from that people just go to whatever community resources they want.
>
> agreed. There are lots of non-official f
+lots to exciting times
On 10 January 2012 23:50, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>
>
> On 1/10/12 3:26 PM, "David Arno" wrote:
>
> > I assume you mean here that the mxmlc compiler uses code also found in
> the
> > asc compiler?
> Yes. Actually, these days, it shortcuts that a bit, but that was
> essentia
+1 this is an opportunity to release legacy code for the greater good.
On 10 January 2012 22:29, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>
>
> On 1/10/12 2:18 PM, "Jonathan Campos" wrote:
>
> > I guess more of a simple execution. But that is besides the point. I'm
> more
> > interested in your thoughts to a newer
+1 this is a volunteer community.
On 10 January 2012 21:57, Peter Elst wrote:
> > I asked Aaron Houston if the AUG team would like to sponsor this... he
> felt
> > that this was more in-line with the Product team, so we should ask them.
> >
>
> Not to stir things up but I have the impression the
>> I don't understand how the compiler can affect the language
Am I correct in thinking if the bytecode generated was understood by the
runime you could make changes to how the language looked before it
compiled? I dont see any usecases for this and I dont see it as a good idea
either so non-starte
That does beg the question how we organise tracking votes anyway
On 10 January 2012 16:17, Peter Elst wrote:
> I'm wondering if we should be providing feedback on the logo threads coming
> in and have people make variations based on that. I'd say if people want
> feedback they can always reach o
Have Adobe said it would continue to use compc / mxmlc internally?
Either way the runtime would still have to support the languages features
added so that limits whats possible.
On 10 January 2012 16:18, Raju Bitter wrote:
> 2012/1/10 Matthew Poole :
> > I dont think it necessaril
Very interesting.
I dont think it necessarily follows that because the compiler is donated
that control over the language is assumed. Though it would be fantastic to
add some of the languges features that have been added to HaXe...
On 10 January 2012 10:51, David Arno wrote:
> I think you raise
...and so say all of us!
On 10 January 2012 14:49, Rui Silva wrote:
> > From: "Raju Bitter"
> > Sent: terça-feira, 10 de Janeiro de 2012 14:37
> > (...) But the future is
> > JavaScript/HTML5 - which even Adobe has admitted.
> >
> > - Raju
>
> Before hell breaks loose (again), I'd would like to
I quite like this, its a nice idea. Definately a contender.
On 10 January 2012 13:21, Quentin Le Hénaff wrote:
> what about a curved arrows from the center to the edges ?
> like it's "flexible and spreading"?
>
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Hercules Fisherman
> wrote:
>
> > accept it is t
Its pretty cool, but looks a bit close to the Adobe logo, there may be
issues with that...
On 10 January 2012 09:33, Rui Silva wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As I've told earlier, I played around a little bit with Carlos' logo
> proposal and came up with a few variations that, to my eyes, solve one of
> the p
>>AOP is probably a language thing, which we do not have control of.
Fair point Alex, AOP probably would better be a language feature rather
than a framework feature. Though we might see something sooner if we
implement it as a framework feature.
Having said that if enough f the micro-architecture
Are we ready to start, can we blog the competition?
On 9 January 2012 19:37, Anne Kathrine Petterøe wrote:
> On 9 January 2012 18:20, Bertrand Delacretaz
> wrote:
> >
> > Don't you want to add some information about what people win?
> >
> > IMO the only prize is that we'll give credit somewhere
+ 1 individual dev set up should not be committed
On 9 January 2012 17:11, Jun Heider wrote:
> +1 to what Campos said. That's what README are for.
> On Jan 9, 2012 9:01 AM, "Roland Zwaga" wrote:
>
> > +1! :)
> >
> > On 9 January 2012 16:59, Jonathan Campos wrote:
> >
> > > I'd really love to s
+1 to the AOP idea
On 9 January 2012 17:06, Jonathan Campos wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Michael Schmalle >wrote:
>
> > I agree to, something that would deprecate the;
>
>
> It will probably be something I will focus on. So I can get ride of:
>
>
>
>
>
> . . .
>
> And all the o
Hi,
Newbie post, so a bug Hey! to everyone. Really would be good to see the
Jira instance set up.
Matt
On 8 January 2012 09:43, Sebastian Mohr wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> When would be the best time to speak about the Flex roadmap?
> When we will start to define milestones and tickets for the next
40 matches
Mail list logo
