Hi Carlos,

I'm not sure if it is better for Jewel to extend from UIBase or not.  I
just want to understand the technical reasons why you decided not to
extend UIBase.  We want to make sure UIBase works for as many people as
possible, but on the other hand, I wouldn't mind proving that the
framework doesn't require org.apache.royale.core.UIBase.  Hopefully the
framework uses IUIBase instead.  It should be ok for someone to come up
with a completely different base class as long as it conforms to IUIBase
and other interfaces.

Thanks,
-Alex

On 4/10/18, 8:54 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
<carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of carlosrov...@apache.org> wrote:

>Hi Alex,
>
>the plan was to reuse as much as I can basic functionality. You think is
>better to extend directly from UIBase? (In this case JewelUIBase)
>If you think is better, then I'll go that path and we can UIBase
>untouched.
>
>thanks
>
>2018-04-10 17:15 GMT+02:00 Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.invalid>:
>
>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
>-- 
>Carlos Rovira
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2
>Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C94ea37bd6a1546511d8208d5
>9efb78b1%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636589725255561689&s
>data=rjHuwyQi0bB9d%2Fg3dfZwUnKO6Pcgdv9WDkDduUxoBi8%3D&reserved=0

Reply via email to