On 4/20/16, 7:16 AM, "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> wrote:
>And what about calling that stuff "Flex 5"? > >We'd have the flex5 compiler (aka Falcon), framework (aka ASJS) ... Possible, but IMO, Flex 5 implies more backward-compatibility than FlexJS can currently deliver. That said, as I've been working on the Spark/MX-like component set, it as occurred to me that some day, when some JS runtime decides to support weak references and maybe object keys, and if we are otherwise successful getting Spark/MX-like components to run in FlexJS, that if the performance overhead of the work required to get that code to run is small enough, we could "re-base" the flex-sdk repo on top of flex-asjs classes and that would truly be a Flex 5 sort of thing. So in my mind, I'm saving Flex 5 for that day. Also, I'm not sure we are going to wait for the Spark/MX-like component set to declare FlexJS as a 1.0, so I'm still thinking we want a different name. I like having the "JS" in the product name because I think "JS" are important initials to make it clear that this product is for JS app development. Also, there is so many examples about Flex for Flash in the internet, I'd rather not use just "Flex" for content related to producing JS apps because existing examples often mention Flash and could be confusing for folks, and I want to encourage newbies to start with the Basic component set or 3rd-party component sets and not MX or Spark as MX and Spark are likely to be heavy and slow. I also forgot to mention in my last post, that while it is great to have new folks helping out, and it may sound like we have people working on the important things, we could always use more help! If you are reading this, you can help just by trying it out, filing bugs, offering improvements on the documentation, blogging about it, and hopefully, submitting code patches. All those things help make FlexJS ready a bit sooner. Thanks, -Alex
