On 10/27/16, 8:44 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira" <carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of carlos.rov...@codeoscopic.com> wrote:
>Hi Olaf, I think is more about efficiency and optimization. AMF is binary, >more compacted and faster that any other method I known out there. in >terms >of usability is as well more easy to work with. > >I'm afraid that AMF could not be successful as JSON maybe due to people >not >know about the openness of the format and as well due to the way to work >with it through typed objects. One of its advantages and maybe a >disadventage since JSON is maybe more direct to work with (but very >cumbersome in the end). > I hope to see someone, maybe Prashant, make a serious effort at porting RemoteObject to FlexJS. I'm not clear how much Flash-dependency there really is other than NetConnection. I think we've pretty much have a good enough Reflection API in FlexJS. I'm interested to see how efficient AMF will be in JS. It certainly was more efficient in Flash, but that's because the AMF conversion is done in C code in the runtime. For FlexJS in JS, it will be done in JS where as JSON.parse() runs in browser code and not in JS. So there is a chance that JSON will be faster than AMF in JS. JSON seems to support a "reviver" which I think might be usable to have JSON efficiently create the FlexJS equivalent of typed instances of Value Objects in JS. IMO, this question will just keep being asked until we implement RemoteObject and run some tests. -Alex
