Justin, this is not worth the time being spent on it. Can we focus more on the priorities from the summit [1]? Or maybe a feature like AMF that some folks really need?
[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/3ef2cc9fcd17bbf0c81b38c35586790255277f bb4f727db8882920ec@%3Cdev.flex.apache.org%3E -Alex On 7/17/17, 11:28 PM, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote: >Hi, > >> No. The consensus was that the compiler needs improvement to replace >>static constants with string literals and for now to not enforce one way >>or the other. > >I’m not sure how you get that from the two threads he had on this. I’m >happy to go through and summaries the thread for you if you want or if >you prefer let call a VOTE and abide by the results of that? > >> Until the compiler is fixed, my personal preference remains to use >>string literals. > >You personal preference that may be that but you changed code so that it >not longer uses constants. > >>> I also note the code is using "”+requestStatus to convert a number to >>>a string. Any reason for not using the toString or >>>String(requestStatus) instead? >> >> It’s more concise. > >It’s also buggy (for large numbers for instance) so I would take care in >using it, if you were worried about null or undefined then >String(requestStatus) will do what you need and is much clearer to >understand. > >Thanks, >Justin
