Why are Jewel components not extending UIBase?

On 4/10/18, 3:45 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
<carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of carlosrov...@apache.org> wrote:

>Hi
>
>I think we can take another approach. Since I'm finding that half of Jewel
>components are not extending basic components for one reason or another,
>maybe a good option would be:
>
>1.- Left UIBase untouched
>
>2.- Make JewelUIBase that extends UIBase, and introduced that code
>
>3.- Refactor Jewel components to use JewelUIBase
>
>In this way Basic, and other sets will remain untouched and not affected
>by
>this change
>
>Let me know what do you think about it.
>
>Thanks
>
>
>2018-04-10 9:11 GMT+02:00 Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com>:
>
>> The article you linked to was a very old article. I already responded to
>> that. I would need some tests to prove that it’s still true today. The
>> tests that I saw seemed to indicate that it wasn’t.
>>
>> Philosophically, I think you are tying the behavior of UIBase too
>>closely
>> with the thinking behind Jewel which relies very heavily on class names
>>and
>> requires that users do not change that. I don’t think that’s going to be
>> true for every component set.
>>
>> I completely agree with Alex’s response.
>>
>> My $0.02,
>> Harbs
>>
>> > On Apr 10, 2018, at 12:50 AM, Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Harbs,
>> >
>> > I though I did it. I give links to peformance links that for me proved
>> that
>> > people is going through classList.
>>
>>
>
>
>-- 
>Carlos Rovira
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2
>Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cdaafba5ff16a4a20856508d5
>9ed02fcc%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636589539427581762&s
>data=Y9fXcrA51Ox3ztRIM4s0Z%2BH3vSUkagbqXpU1W6slul0%3D&reserved=0

Reply via email to