What would be the results for Alina if you will have that swc ? She simply will be able to launch application without the error - That's the idea ?
2018-02-27 19:38 GMT+01:00 Harbs <[email protected]>: > Maybe. Not sure. > > How does the client know what needs to be implemented and how do they go > about implementing that? > > > On Feb 27, 2018, at 8:32 PM, Alex Harui <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Hmm, maybe I'm not understanding you. If we decide to create a SWC with > a > > spark.components.Button and Alina needs 12 APIs and we only have time > > right now to implement 6 of them, how would you handle the missing 6? > > > > I would just implement those APIs but they wouldn't do anything. They > > would contain a comment or trace statement or todo. I don't think I > would > > create a dummy/stub spark.components.Button class, just dummy/stub > methods > > and properties. > > > > Maybe we are saying the same thing? > > -Alex > > > > On 2/27/18, 10:15 AM, "Harbs" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> If things are no-op or to-dos wouldn’t “stubs” or “dummy” classes be > >> better? > >> > >> What’s the advantage of having partially functional SWCs? It seems to me > >> like it would mask the issues? > >> > >> Harbs > >> > >>> On Feb 27, 2018, at 7:48 PM, Alex Harui <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> On the users list, Alina has provided the API report for the main > >>> portion > >>> of her application. We are still waiting to get a report on her SWC > >>> library. She might have a pile of modules to report on as well. > >>> > >>> Based just on the main application, and her saying that she has 500 > MXML > >>> files to port, I'm leaning towards creating migration SWCs that reduce > >>> the > >>> amount of copy/paste. In her data, we see that only 12 out of more > than > >>> 100 APIs on s:Button are being used, and we have 6 of them implemented > >>> already. The plan would be to write the remaining six. Some, like > >>> useHandCursor might be temporary no-ops or to-dos. > >>> > >>> I've been pondering what to name these libraries. I've been using > >>> MXish.SWC and Sparkish.SWC, but maybe we want a better name like > >>> MXMigration.SWC/SparkMigration.SWC or MXRoyale.SWC/SparkRoyale.SWC or > >>> RoyaleMX/RoyaleSpark.SWC. I want to imply that it isn't fully backward > >>> compatible in the name of the SWC if possible. > >>> > >>> We could leave the namespace URI as > >>> > >>> xmlns:s="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/spark" > >>> xmlns:mx="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/mx" > >>> > >>> > >>> just to have one less thing to change in each MXML file, although it > >>> might > >>> be better to use a different namespace URI to get "adobe.com" out of > >>> there > >>> which might help imply that it isn't fully backward compatible and go > >>> with: > >>> > >>> xmlns:s="library://ns.apache.org/royale/spark" > >>> xmlns:mx="library://ns.apache.org/royale/mx" > >>> > >>> I don't think we'd bother to fully re-create the Flex class hierarchy > at > >>> this time, but I think we will need to create a UIComponent that > >>> subclasses UIBase and have all migration components extend that instead > >>> of > >>> extending Express or Basic components because we need to change the way > >>> percentWidth/Height work in the migration components. UIBase sets the > >>> style.width to a % value, but we don't want that in the migration > >>> components. The Flex layout classes use percentage differently. The > >>> cool > >>> thing is that if we wrote our beads correctly, we can re-compose the > >>> functionality from Basic and Express onto this migration library and it > >>> will "just work". This illustrates the value of composition over > >>> subclassing. > >>> > >>> > >>> I think it will be a few more days before we have all of the data from > >>> Alina and know how big this task will be so now is a good time to > >>> discuss > >>> some of the details on how this would work. > >>> > >>> Thoughts? > >>> -Alex > >>> > >> > > > > -- Piotr Zarzycki Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>*
