On 3/13/18, 3:16 PM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
<carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of carlosrov...@apache.org> wrote:

>Hi Alex,
>
>2018-03-13 19:20 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.invalid>:
>
>> Hi Carlos,
>>
>> I took a quick look.
>>
>> 1) I don't see how if the user did:
>>
>> myComp.className = "Carlos";
>> myComp.className = "";
>>
>>
>Right this case is missing, we need to add it, but seems simple since is
>deal with value == ""

Carlos, that was a simple example.  What about:

myComp.className = "Carlos Piotr Alex";
myComp.className = "Carlos Alex";

The "Piotr" class would need to be removed.

>
>
>> That 'Carlos' would be removed from the classList.
>>
>> 2) I still don't like that we are calling split and apply on classList
>> even for simple assignment of a single className
>>
>> 3) I don't like that as we aggregate typeNames that we will reset
>> className to "" and call split more than once.  Not to mention the
>> overhead of the extra function calls now that typeNames is not a var and
>> now a getter/setter.
>>
>
>ok
>
>>
>>
>> That said, I also took another look at the Basic UIBase code and don't
>> like it either.  Seems like it could be optimized as well and have
>> setClassName call computeFinalClassNames.
>>
>> Regarding performance.  I think the key issue is that every change to
>> element.className or element.classList can cause a DOM update, so you
>> don't want to change element.className or element.classList more than
>>once
>> during the initialization of the component.  I didn't watch the videos
>>you
>> linked to, but in the first link to a blog post, that person was just
>> replacing a one-time setting of className to a string with a call to
>> classList.add.  But his code is probably pre-parsed into the parameter
>> list to classList.add.  We have to compute it from a String.split.  And
>> the current code you have proposed is going to change classList several
>> times as we aggregate typeNames.  That doesn't seem right.
>>
>
>I think the video is short and explained very well. I think is good to
>review it
>
>But I think is ok to change my code to get a better performant one. Mine
>was created only to see
>it works, now we need to tune depending on the different entry points as
>you say
>
>
>> If you want to use classList everywhere, I think we'd have to shadow it
>> with an array so we only set the array of strings on classList as
>>needed,
>> but classList isn't set up to do a full replacement, AFAICT.
>>
>> IMO, if you want to continue to pursue use of classList, you would focus
>> on just replacing computeFinalClassNames and/or setClassName with
>> classList handling and see how it looks.  Leave typeNames as a var and
>>let
>> it aggregate without touching classList.  UIBase will eventually call
>> setClassName in addedToParent.  That is the point in the lifecycle where
>> the user might have set some classNames and the typeNames have been
>> aggregated and maybe "fab" or "primary" has been set as well.  Either
>>you
>> track everything in a shadow array or you do one big split then.
>>
>> Do we know if you set className then read classList, doesn't classList
>> represent the things set in className?  If that's the case, then in
>> MDL/Jewel, "fab" and "primary" should just check to see if addedToParent
>> has been called and the classNames/classList has been stuffed and if it
>> has, just call classList.toggle.
>>
>> However, IMO, the simplest solution should be to leave UIBase as is.
>>MDL
>> and Jewel should just have to override computeFinalClassNames to include
>> adding "fab"/"primary" to the final set of strings.  I don't understand
>> why other work would be needed.  But the "fab"/"primary" getter setters
>> should be able to call classList.toggle instead of
>>computeFinalClassNames
>> and/or setClassName.
>>
>> If you want to separately prove that it is faster to call String.split()
>> and set classList instead of passing the space-delimited strings to
>> className, that's fine too.  The difference for us vs the link you
>>posted
>> is that we MUST start with space-delimited strings coming from the MXML,
>> so at least one split() call is required.
>>
>
>I spend some hours trying and
>* change typeNames to only one var again, then in addToParent I reset the
>className, I think this solves the problem of using typeNames lots of
>times
>and call split and apply lots of times
>* I tried to create again a computedFinalClassNames to handle classList.
>* The only problem I see is that if don't see any way to avoid call split
>and apply each time you call setClassName since a compute final is needed.
>Or I'm missing something?

Not sure. I was wondering if you could track which elements in the array
belong to typeNames so that portion doesn't need to be re-split.  I really
don't know.  Like maybe when typeNames is first split, remember the number
of elements in the split.

HTH,
-Alex
>
>Maybe could be good that you write some code (pseudo code) here better to
>explain what you propose
>since I don't know if I'm understanding your phrases accurately
>
>It's time for me to go to sleep, tomorrow I'll check if you posted
>something to try it
>
>thanks!
>
>
>>
>> Of course, I could be missing something...
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 3/13/18, 10:30 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos
>>Rovira"
>> <carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of carlosrov...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> >Hi Alex,
>> >
>> >right, I tested it in JewelExample. If you find something that does not
>> >conform to what you thinked please let me know to address it.
>> >I think it should not be very difficult to handle some isolated case
>>with
>> >what we have
>> >
>> >thanks
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >2018-03-13 18:24 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.invalid>:
>> >
>> >> Hi Carlos,
>> >>
>> >> Just so I'm clear, you believe that UIBase.as in the jewel-ui-set
>>branch
>> >> addresses all of these issues?  I've just been watching commits, so
>>if
>> >>you
>> >> think that's the case then I will look at the current state of your
>> >>UIBase.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> -Alex
>> >>
>> >> On 3/13/18, 10:14 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos
>> >>Rovira"
>> >> <carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of carlosrov...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Hi Alex,
>> >> >
>> >> >2018-03-13 17:50 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.invalid>:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Hi Carlos,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I do not think you are considering all of the scenarios in your
>> >>proposed
>> >> >> code.  I'm sad that I have to delineate them again, but I will
>>try.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 1) In Basic there are two sets of strings:  The fixed set from
>> >>typeNames
>> >> >> that should "never" change.  And the className set from the user
>>that
>> >> >>can
>> >> >> not only add, but also remove a set of HTML classes.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >I see the next email so I respond to this in the following, I solved
>> >>that
>> >> >and explain later
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> 2) In MDL and I guess Jewel, there is a third set.  They are tied
>>to
>> >> >> properties like you said.  "fab" and "primary", and things like
>>that.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >Yes this will be the normal case in users. People using Jewel or
>>other
>> >>UI
>> >> >set with look and feel will
>> >> >use properties as their normal basis in the same way they do now in
>>MDL
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 3) For PAYG reasons, it would be great if Basic did not have to
>> >> >> contemplate the third set.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 4) For PAYG reasons, it would be nice if Basic did not have to
>>assume
>> >> >> conversion to array and call split().  The current code in the
>> >>develop
>> >> >> branch lets the browser do the split() in native code.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >for 3 and 4 what's the best way to left UIBase untouched so I can
>>use
>> >>my
>> >> >code in Jewel?
>> >> >Is the actual way of duplicating the code for UIBase in my own
>>library
>> >>the
>> >> >best way?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Then, as a performance consideration, Harbs claims that changing
>> >> >>classList
>> >> >> is expensive.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >I don't will say that there's a low performance, but my guess is
>>that
>> >>is
>> >> >nothing that we should have in consideration, but we can discuss it
>> >>later.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> So, your proposed solution MUST allow the user to delete/remove
>>any
>> >> >> strings they added without removing strings added from typeNames
>>or
>> >>from
>> >> >> the "fab"/"primary" properties.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >That's now working
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> And allow add/remove of the user's
>> >> >> strings before or after changing properties like "fab" and
>>"primary".
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >as we are dealing with a collection this is working and only one
>>copy
>> >>of
>> >> >the string is maintained and outputted, I think in this way
>> >> >less errors of this kind should happen
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Show us how that will work.  I'm pretty sure it is possible.
>>Then we
>> >> >>will
>> >> >> debate the performance aspects.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >I have it right now completely working in my branch, so it's a
>>matter
>> >>to
>> >> >try it in JewelExample
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thanks,
>> >> >> -Alex
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On 3/13/18, 6:49 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos
>> >> >>Rovira"
>> >> >> <carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of carlosrov...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >So, you if is == you expect that setting className in royale you
>> >>remove
>> >> >> >all
>> >> >> >inclusive typeNames?
>> >> >> >Harbs, className is not equal to class in HTML
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >2018-03-13 14:08 GMT+01:00 Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com>:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> className in Royale == class in HTML.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > On Mar 13, 2018, at 2:55 PM, Carlos Rovira
>> >> >><carlosrov...@apache.org>
>> >> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > I think we're getting to the point in this discussion.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > For me as a user, I expect to use className property to
>>"add",
>> >>and
>> >> >>not
>> >> >> >> > override all I have
>> >> >> >> > for that reason in MDL and now in Royale we decided to create
>> >> >> >>properties
>> >> >> >> > (that use to be boolean) like "primary" or in MDL "fab" to
>>add
>> >>or
>> >> >> >>remove
>> >> >> >> > those properties (since are library properties that are
>>managed
>> >> >> >> > specifically).
>> >> >> >> > I don't want to set primary and then className removes that!
>>I
>> >> >>think
>> >> >> >>that
>> >> >> >> > function is not right and will be the cause of many problems.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > If the user wants to remove all class names, he can do with a
>> >> >>method
>> >> >> >>that
>> >> >> >> > callls element.classList.remove, but the behavior by default
>> >> >> >>shouldn't be
>> >> >> >> > to use className to get rid of all what we have.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > If you work with html directly , is normal to write
>> >>class="class1
>> >> >> >>class2
>> >> >> >> > ..." and create from scratch
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > in Royale you write mxml and as3 and use className to add
>> >> >>additional
>> >> >> >> > classes that are not in the api but not to remove the ones
>>the
>> >> >> >>component
>> >> >> >> > set plus the ones the user "switched" on/off due to
>>properties
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > 2018-03-13 13:42 GMT+01:00 Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com>:
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> No. className is supposed to *replace* the entire classList
>> >>minus
>> >> >>the
>> >> >> >> >> internally managed ones (i.e. typeNames). Your code
>>drastically
>> >> >> >>changes
>> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> >> current behavior.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> You cannot use add for that and replacing the classList will
>> >> >>destroy
>> >> >> >> your
>> >> >> >> >> custom class names.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>> On Mar 13, 2018, at 2:34 PM, Carlos Rovira
>> >> >><carlosrov...@apache.org
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>> Solving the multiple string value problem:
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>> This: <j:TextButton text="PRIMARY" className="myCustomStyle
>> >>some
>> >> >> >>other"
>> >> >> >> >>> primary="true"/>
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>> *<button type="button" class="jewel button textbutton
>> >> >>myCustomStyle
>> >> >> >> some
>> >> >> >> >>> other primary" style="margin: 10px 0px 0px; display:
>> >> >> >> >>> block;">PRIMARY</button>*
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>> with this change
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>> COMPILE::JS
>> >> >> >> >>> protected function setClassName(value:String):void
>> >> >> >> >>> {
>> >> >> >> >>> var classes:Array = value.split(" ");
>> >> >> >> >>> element.classList.add.apply(element.classList, classes);
>> >> >> >> >>> }
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>> I think this was all the problems we have right?
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>> 2018-03-13 13:20 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira
>> >> >><carlosrov...@apache.org>:
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>>> Hi Piotr,
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>> that's one of the advantages of a collection, order
>>doesn't
>> >> >> >>matter! :)
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>> <j:TextButton text="PRIMARY" className="myCustomStyle"
>> >> >> >> primary="true"/>
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>> output:
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>> *<button type="button" class="jewel button textbutton
>> >> >>myCustomStyle
>> >> >> >> >>>> primary" style="margin: 10px 0px 0px; display:
>> >> >> >> block;">PRIMARY</button>*
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>> this is one of the reason to change, since you'll end
>>trying
>> >>to
>> >> >> >>figure
>> >> >> >> >>>> what comes in first or not.
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>> Do you need more evidence?
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>> Thanks
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>> 2018-03-13 12:48 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki
>> >> >> >><piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com
>> >> >> >> >:
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>> In my example orders matters. Setup first className than
>> >>your
>> >> >> >> property.
>> >> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018, 12:39 Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com>
>> >> >>wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> Hi Carlos,
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> I definitely appreciate the work you are doing. I’m
>>swamped
>> >> >>with
>> >> >> >> work
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> right now, so I don’t have the time to spend helping
>>you.
>> >> >>(Sorry
>> >> >> >> about
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> that.) :-(
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> I think the discussions here are about pretty minor
>>points.
>> >> >>You
>> >> >> >>can
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> certainly implement jewel how you think makes sense,
>>but if
>> >> >>you
>> >> >> >>want
>> >> >> >> >> to
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> make changes to basic in areas which are not broken,
>>there
>> >> >>needs
>> >> >> >>to
>> >> >> >> >> be a
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> really good reason to do so.
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> My $0.02,
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> Harbs
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> On Mar 13, 2018, at 1:31 PM, Carlos Rovira <
>> >> >> >> carlosrov...@apache.org>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> Hi Piotr,
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> thanks for your words, but is difficult to work on
>> >>something
>> >> >> >>when
>> >> >> >> you
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> believe in your vision and others no, and more over
>>when
>> >>all
>> >> >>the
>> >> >> >> >> facts
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> you
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> see corroborates that vision. It's difficult to
>>maintain
>> >>live
>> >> >> >>the
>> >> >> >> >>>>> moto in
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> that scenario.
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> but anyway for you Kindly words
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> Carlos
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> 2018-03-13 12:21 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki <
>> >> >> >> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> :
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> Carlos,
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> In my opinion you are not facing the wall from US. You
>> >>are
>> >> >> >>facing
>> >> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> wall
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> from lack of volounteers who can help, do the job.
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> Believe me your Jewel effort in my list of tasks is
>> >>almost
>> >> >>on
>> >> >> >>the
>> >> >> >> >>>>> Top. I
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> have to fiinish planned work in TranspiledActionScript
>> >>first
>> >> >> >>and I
>> >> >> >> >>>>> hope
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> to
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> join.
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> When it will be - maybe in couple of weeks. In the end
>> >> >> >>something
>> >> >> >> >>>>> have to
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> pay the bills and Royale is only fraction of that.
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> I contribute in other related areas. I Wish I could
>> >> >>contribute
>> >> >> >>in
>> >> >> >> >>>>> your
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> way
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> or Alex and Peter.
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> Thanks for your work!
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> Piotr
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018, 12:00 Piotr Zarzycki <
>> >> >> >> >>>>> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>> I personally said - Go and try, report back. I have
>>gave
>> >> >>you
>> >> >> >>an
>> >> >> >> >> real
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> world
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>> examples where classList failed. Try and post the
>> >>results.
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>> 2018-03-13 11:49 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira <
>> >> >> >> carlosrov...@apache.org
>> >> >> >> >>> :
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> it's very hard to me to invest lot of time both in
>> >>tryin
>> >> >>to
>> >> >> >> >> develop
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> something useful in the look and feel field for us
>> >>where
>> >> >>no
>> >> >> >> other
>> >> >> >> >>>>> is
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> doing
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> work, trying to explain and discuss all issues I
>>find
>> >> >>without
>> >> >> >> get
>> >> >> >> >>>>> any
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> traction. It's like to face a wall all the time.
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> Maybe I'm wrong with my proposals but other times my
>> >> >> >>perception
>> >> >> >> is
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> that
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> things are settled in a particular way
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> and we don't want to change it since is working in
>>the
>> >> >> >>current
>> >> >> >> >>>>> state.
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> But
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> I
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> think we always where thinking of change things as
>>we
>> >> >>evolve
>> >> >> >> >>>>> Royale.
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> We're
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> in a 0.9.2 release, we're not in 1.0, but the way
>>we're
>> >> >> >>managing
>> >> >> >> >>>>> all
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> issues
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> seems to
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> me that we're fine with what we have now and we are
>> >> >>freezing
>> >> >> >>the
>> >> >> >> >>>>> API.
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> In all the issues raised last days only CSS compiler
>> >> >>errors
>> >> >> >>are
>> >> >> >> >>>>> real
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> bugs,
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> since without that fixes royale can't output
>>concrete
>> >>CSS
>> >> >> >>rules
>> >> >> >> (I
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> think
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> those not require any discussion)
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> The font injection is maybe another bug (don't know
>> >>why a
>> >> >> >>class
>> >> >> >> in
>> >> >> >> >>>>> a
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> theme
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> is not "visible" by the final app), but can be
>> >> >>workarounded
>> >> >> >>with
>> >> >> >> >> an
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> html
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> that setup the font for now.
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> Things like classNames discussion are not critical
>>(I
>> >> >>know),
>> >> >> >> it's
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> just a
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> matter to refine the API since I had problems each
>> >>time I
>> >> >>go
>> >> >> >> that
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> path,
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> first with MDL and now with Jewel. Maybe I'm the
>>only
>> >>one
>> >> >> >>since
>> >> >> >> no
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> other
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> has tried what I'm trying to do: Creating Themes.
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> In my opinion, give the users only a way to manage
>> >> >>classNames
>> >> >> >> vía
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> string,
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> is insufficient and cumbersome and deserves at a
>> >>minimun
>> >> >>some
>> >> >> >> API
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> methods
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> since is an important point in how UI is stylized,
>>and
>> >>how
>> >> >> >> >> controls
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> and
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> objects in html can be "extended" or diferenciated
>> >>(Alex
>> >> >> >> explained
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> very
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> well the importance of this in the typenames
>>thread).
>> >>So
>> >> >>some
>> >> >> >> API
>> >> >> >> >>>>> to
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> ease
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> that is for me very Wellcome since I'm doing that
>>work,
>> >> >>and
>> >> >> >>will
>> >> >> >> >> be
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> more
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> users doing that work. In this point, I don't think
>>we
>> >> >>should
>> >> >> >> >>>>> shield
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> us
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> in
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> things like PAYG or if that is a bit less
>>performant.
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> To close and avoid having much discussion to not
>>reach
>> >>to
>> >> >> >>some
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> valuable
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> point:  I can try to go with what we have, but
>>makes me
>> >> >>feel
>> >> >> >>not
>> >> >> >> >> so
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> good
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> about the continuous rejection of my proposals. As
>> >>well,
>> >> >>you
>> >> >> >>are
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> saying
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> that we should wait to what users demand...but I'm
>>an
>> >> >>user of
>> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> >>>>> API,
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> and
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> my perception as a "zero user" seems to be not
>> >>valuable.
>> >> >> >>Since I
>> >> >> >> >>>>> don't
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> get
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> traction on this, I'll try to continue with what we
>> >>have
>> >> >>and
>> >> >> >> >> report
>> >> >> >> >>>>>> back
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> 2018-03-13 9:24 GMT+01:00 Harbs
>> >><harbs.li...@gmail.com>:
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>> +1.
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 13, 2018, at 10:08 AM, Alex Harui
>> >> >> >> >>>>> <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> I am so sad and frustrated that we have spent so
>>much
>> >> >>time
>> >> >> >>on
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> managing a
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> set of strings.  I just don't think we have the
>> >>people
>> >> >> >>power
>> >> >> >> to
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> continue
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> to seek perfection until it is truly needed by a
>> >>user.
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> --
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> Carlos Rovira
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> >> >> http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%
>> >> >> >>2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> >> >> 7Ce137bd7a9095473c2bcc08
>> >> >> >>d588e95a01%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>> >> >> 7C63656545817565873
>> >> >>
>> 
>>>>>>7&sdata=wBMX4vjDjPJZiYA8HcTGKv43mQQbQdaRXJRS%2BM5%2BO5c%3D&reserved=0
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>> --
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>> Piotr Zarzycki
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>> Patreon:
>> >> >> >>*https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> >> >> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pat
>> >> >> >>reon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com
>> >> >> %7Ce137bd7a9095
>> >> >> >>473c2bcc08d588e95a01%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>> >> >> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365654
>> >> >> >>58175658737&sdata=DNkm0Dce279Klqlmt%2BF7YV7%
>> >> >> 2BiDRjzQWyG9GPG1rs2Bw%3D&rese
>> >> >> >>rved=0
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> >> >> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pat
>> >> >> >>reon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com
>> >> >> %7Ce137bd7a9095
>> >> >> >>473c2bcc08d588e95a01%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>> >> >> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365654
>> >> >> >>58175658737&sdata=DNkm0Dce279Klqlmt%2BF7YV7%
>> >> >> 2BiDRjzQWyG9GPG1rs2Bw%3D&rese
>> >> >> >>rved=0>*
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> --
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>> Carlos Rovira
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>>
>> >> >> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> >> >> http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%
>> >> >> >>2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> >> >> 7Ce137bd7a9095473c2bcc08
>> >> >> >>d588e95a01%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>> >> >> 7C63656545817565873
>> >> >>
>> 
>>>>>>7&sdata=wBMX4vjDjPJZiYA8HcTGKv43mQQbQdaRXJRS%2BM5%2BO5c%3D&reserved=0
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>> --
>> >> >> >> >>>> Carlos Rovira
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> >> >> http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%
>> >> >> >>2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> >> >> 7Ce137bd7a9095473c2bcc08
>> >> >> >>d588e95a01%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>> >> >> 7C63656545817565873
>> >> >>
>> 
>>>>>>7&sdata=wBMX4vjDjPJZiYA8HcTGKv43mQQbQdaRXJRS%2BM5%2BO5c%3D&reserved=0
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >> >>> --
>> >> >> >> >>> Carlos Rovira
>> >> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> >> >> http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%
>> >> >> >>2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> >> >> 7Ce137bd7a9095473c2bcc08
>> >> >> >>d588e95a01%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>> >> >> 7C63656545817565873
>> >> >>
>> 
>>>>>>7&sdata=wBMX4vjDjPJZiYA8HcTGKv43mQQbQdaRXJRS%2BM5%2BO5c%3D&reserved=0
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > --
>> >> >> >> > Carlos Rovira
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> >> >> http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%
>> >> >> >>2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> >> >> 7Ce137bd7a9095473c2bcc08
>> >> >> >>d588e95a01%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>> >> >> 7C63656545817565873
>> >> >>
>> 
>>>>>>7&sdata=wBMX4vjDjPJZiYA8HcTGKv43mQQbQdaRXJRS%2BM5%2BO5c%3D&reserved=0
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >--
>> >> >> >Carlos Rovira
>> >> >> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> >> >> http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2
>> >> >> >Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> >> >> 7Ce137bd7a9095473c2bcc08d5
>> >> >> >88e95a01%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>> >> >> 7C636565458175658737&s
>> >> >> 
>>>data=wBMX4vjDjPJZiYA8HcTGKv43mQQbQdaRXJRS%2BM5%2BO5c%3D&reserved=0
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >--
>> >> >Carlos Rovira
>> >> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> >> http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2
>> >> >Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> >> 7Cce849efb1cf84ab780ae08d5
>> >> >8905f78a%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>> >> 7C636565581091621628&s
>> >> >data=5bptuicHsczeSJ84dMNT8%2FFZG42Ai732OmY8QCEbgXo%3D&reserved=0
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >--
>> >Carlos Rovira
>> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2
>> >Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> 7C6de99e3bf5d844c2d09508d5
>> >890825d0%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>> 7C636565590443837727&s
>> >data=S%2F5fMzHFvlp8PHkdA28CcWSeMvcly1YJXTmDz6l0fUM%3D&reserved=0
>>
>>
>
>
>-- 
>Carlos Rovira
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2
>Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C1ca96ed710784d65283408d5
>893021e1%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636565762176651455&s
>data=BMnY%2BfW6dLZq0xVS3f1jTATtbUEXWOiaWFGRIwwPu7U%3D&reserved=0

Reply via email to