@Harbs, Yup agreed. Wait until AS"next". My text wrapping (eMagazine) project seems such a long time ago. I had a couple of commercial enquiries about developing this further - but nothing materialised in the end. I moved onto other projects, planning to come back to this - but realistically I don't think I'll ever have time. OK - I could donate it to open-source if there was interest. I'd need to do a bit of tidying-up first.
The AIR app is no longer available, but there are some youtube videos on my old blog: http://e2easy.wordpress.com/2009/12/03/first-beta-prototype-of-e2publish-here-now/ http://e2easy.wordpress.com/2010/04/28/e2publish-video-tutorials/ On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 5:39 PM, Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm not sure that people have a problem with your attitude. (I definitely > don't.) I think that it wasn't totally clear what you were proposing. > > Basically, there's not much to talk about until ASNext is available and > the actual work on these components could be done. What you say about > waiting makes sense to me. It seems likely to me that building on your > components will make sense, but I don't see how we can know until we see > what develops between now and then. > > On a totally separate topic: > > I know you did work a while back on implementing text wrap for TLF. What's > the status of that work? Is it something you might consider donating? I'm > sure many of us would not mind polishing it up, if it's not yet ready for > publication… > > Harbs > > On Jan 24, 2013, at 4:23 AM, Daniel Freeman wrote: > > > @Om, I think people misunderstand what I've demoed here. The demo was a > > very quick and dirty proof of concept. An experiment I didn't want to > > spend too much time on - because too much investment at this time might > be > > lost when we get to the other side of the AS"next" cataclysm. > > > > I could have subclassed viewStack and dealt with transitions there, > solving > > any synch problems the way I do in MadComponents. But I went with a > quick > > lash-up. > > > > My intention for MC3D"next" is to fully integrate Stage3D capabilities > into > > MadComponents. > > > > Maybe you've noticed that my Stage3D MC3D classes aren't fully integrated > > into MadComponents. If you think that they're bolted on the side - you'd > > be right. And there's a good reason for this. Stage3D is bolted on the > > side of AS3. The further that I get into work-arounds, the more I'm > > probably wasting effort on matters that will hopefully be resolved in > > AS"next" anyway. > > > > I have a lot of display-list Sprite.graphics drawing going on right now. > > And unrestricted styling of display-list text. I'm hoping that AS"next" > > will provide new vector graphics and text classes for Stage3D - and if it > > does, re-writing my existing component rendering code might be > > straightforward. And I might not need a geometric renderer work-around > > after all. > > > > But I don't know yet. > > > > Personally, I wouldn't invest too much effort in a new framework now. ( > > Unless, you're on a beta programme for AS"next" that I don't know about > ). > > For me, there are too many unknowns right now. If I were you, I would > > plan to work on this intensely on this as soon as an AS"next" beta > > programme kicks off. > > > > Om, I've come onto this forum being completely honest about my > intentions. > > And people don't like my attitude. It is my intention deliver > MC3D"next". > > Not Flex"next". My idea is to offer these classes as the basis for > > Flex"next" - if you want. > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 9:04 AM, Om <bigosma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:30 AM, Daniel Freeman < > madcompone...@gmail.com > >>> wrote: > >> > >>> I've done some experiments with Stage3D accelerated Flex components, > >>> derived from MadComponents classes. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > http://madskool.wordpress.com/2013/01/21/madcomponents3d-part5-stage3d-accelerated-flex/ > >>> > >>> It is my intention to port MadComponents to AS"next". I propose that > >> these > >>> ported MadComponents/MC3D classes might form the basis of a new Flex > >> mobile > >>> framework that utilises hardware GPU rendering. > >>> > >>> I'm aware that Thibault Imbert has proposed that a new Flex framework > >>> should be based on Starling and Feathers. But I believe that the MC3D > >>> approach is better suited to the next Flex mobile framework. > >>> > >>> MadComponents is a fully fledged framework, not just a UI framework. > It > >>> allows for versatile styling of components (without having to design > >>> texture skins), server communication, and memory management. > >>> > >>> However, until we know more about AS"next", which framework approach to > >>> choose is mostly speculation. > >>> > >>> So I'd like the members of this group to read my blog post, and let me > >> know > >>> what they think. > >>> > >> > >> > >> Daniel, > >> > >> Thanks for your interest in helping out Apache Flex! > >> > >> I have been following Madcomponents and your blog for a while now. I > >> looked your example in your "stage3d accelerated flex" post [1]. While > >> that is good for a nice looking demo, I dont think that the approach you > >> suggest can be used to support an real framework like Flex. > >> > >> Whenever I see a reference to FlexGlobals.topLevelApplication anywhere > in a > >> component's code, I always think of it as a hackish workaround trying to > >> cover up for the lack of a good design. More specifically, this > approach > >> would blow up when there are two instances (Lists in your example) on > the > >> stage and we try to animate both of them at the same time or at a slight > >> lag. The topLevelApplication goes invisible, the first List does its > thing > >> on the gpu, then sets the topLevelApplication to be visible. Now, if > the > >> second component had already started the transition, it would expect the > >> topLevelApplication to be invisible while it runs. But the first > component > >> would have made it visible because it had finished running. This would > >> cause quite serious rendering issues to say the least. > >> > >> While I have your attention, I would like to talk about another blog > post > >> of yours that I had bookmarked a while ago [2] Here, you talk about > >> building a set of UI components from scratch that would directly draw to > >> Stage3D (no starling or anything in between) I think that your example > and > >> your approach made a lot of sense. If you have been following the > thread > >> [3], we are talking about a brand new flex framework designed from > scratch. > >> This is where I am planning to spend my time on for the next few months. > >> My hope was to start building a graphics rendering layer that draws > >> directly to Stage3D, much like how you mention in the blog post. Is > this > >> something you can help out with? This approach would set us free of the > >> shackles of the current Flex framework - which frankly needs a lot of > >> rework and/or hacks to support Stage3D. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Om > >> > >> > >> [1] > >> > >> > http://code.google.com/p/mad-components/source/browse/trunk/FlexMadComponents/src/FlexMadPageTransitions.mxml > >> [2] > >> > >> > http://madskool.wordpress.com/2012/04/10/drawing-madcomponents-with-stage3d/ > >> [3] http://markmail.org/message/yjykc72a7qeoootr > >> > >
