I've been working as a web developer many many years ago. You can't even imagine what kind of hacks we had to do in order to dispay something sophisticated in IE. My colleague who took from time to time some freelance job when Client wanted to be compatible with IE8 or whatever next version - always trippled the price because it was a nightmare. :)
I've been working for a Client (large corporation with thousends of thousends clients) 6 months ago who had big app in Flex. Where the time has come to move forward from Flex to modern web browser technology - There were absolutely no talk about supporting anything like IE. :) IE - in whatever version for me -1 (Binding). :) Thanks, Piotr On Sun, Feb 25, 2018, 09:31 Carlos Rovira <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > my opinion about fallback compatibility is that I expect people creating > Royale Apps in 2018 and beyond with actual browsers and systems, not with > old ones. > If a client has IE8 support, then normaly will have Edge, Chrome and > Firefox as well, or if target Android devices, they will be in at least in > Android 4 or 5. So it seems to me a hard task if we should take into > account older systems that nowadays has very low user base, and even a > nightmare since we should have to focus in test compatibility while we > don't have people to do so. So that's not doable by us. > > So for me the plan should be to focus in the actual systems widely used and > when we get a state near 1.0 (not talking about the number itself, but the > feeling that we can make a Royale App with certain easeness and have almost > all the functionality we need), maybe it would be ok to look at what system > versions are most used and make a plan to stick with them as long as we > can, or at least taking care of how to evolve royale without breaking > things for that systems since we'll have users and Royale Apps out there > that needs to have that support. > > > > 2018-02-25 9:02 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira <[email protected]>: > > > Hi Harbs, > > > > if ObjectMap is a Dictionary, why don't you rename it to that? I think it > > will make more easy for new comers to get it > > > > Thanks > > > > 2018-02-24 21:59 GMT+01:00 Gabe Harbs <[email protected]>: > > > >> There is a ObjectMap class which uses WeakMap or Map and falls back to > >> regular objects on platforms whether that is not supported. > >> http://royale.apache.org/asdoc/#!org.apache.royale.utils/ObjectMap < > >> http://royale.apache.org/asdoc/#!org.apache.royale.utils/ObjectMap> > >> > >> It should be a decent replacement for Dictionary (including weak > >> references). The only caveat is you need to use get() and set() instead > of > >> bracket access. > >> > >> I just added documentation and cleaned it up a bit. > >> > >> What’s interesting about that class is I needed to do some weird things > >> with the methods to reassign them. They are not showing up in the ASDoc > >> very well… > >> > >> There might be a better way to declare the method (variable) proxies. > Not > >> sure… > >> > >> HTH, > >> Harbs > >> > >> > On Feb 24, 2018, at 9:10 PM, Greg Dove <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >> > That might make porting some legacy Flex code a > >> > lot easier, for example because (iiuc) I think that means Dictionary > >> with > >> > weak keys could be supported. [3] (and I know Harbs did something > >> related > >> > to this in the past, maybe some sort of polyfill, can't recall > exactly) > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > > Carlos Rovira > > http://about.me/carlosrovira > > > > > > > -- > Carlos Rovira > http://about.me/carlosrovira >
