Alex Harui wrote > On 8/8/16, 6:23 AM, "Harbs" < > harbs.lists@
> > wrote: > >>> 2) The supposedly heavyweight model that is rich with convenience >>>methods >>> doesn't actually result in heavy instances. The methods are all stored >>>once >>> on the prototype and not duplicated per instance. So using the >>>'lightweight' >>> model doesn't really make the difference one might hope it would. > > If extra methods are bringing in extra dependencies, then I would consider > having a subclass with those extra methods/dependencies. If the extra > dependencies are a few interfaces, then I would just bake them in. > > My 2 cents, > -Alex To make sure I understand your point, I'll rephrase it: as long as we're not importing new classes to implement the convenience methods we should go ahead and add them. They should still implement some interface. Correct? I hadn't considered compiler optimizations as a way to work around method call overhead. I think it makes for a convincing argument for freely using interfaces after all. -- View this message in context: http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/FlexJS-Interfaces-Pay-as-You-Go-Performance-tp54380p54407.html Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
