Ah - I guess it is. Says that WAY down the web page - not in the top where it says, "download". What's the best one for Windows?
Jason Merrill | E-Learning Solutions | icfconsulting.com >>-----Original Message----- >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:flashcoders- >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of hank williams >>Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 12:02 PM >>To: Flashcoders mailing list >>Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Faster code? >> >>I think its a mac app. >> >>Hank >> >>On 12/23/05, Merrill, Jason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> I downloaded the trial, but what's a .dmg file and how do I unpack it in >>> Windows? Couldn't find any info on their site - and double-clicking the >>> file gives me an error - unrecognized file type. >>> >>> Jason Merrill | E-Learning Solutions | icfconsulting.com >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>-----Original Message----- >>> >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:flashcoders- >>> >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Merrill, Jason >>> >>Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 11:42 AM >>> >>To: Flashcoders mailing list >>> >>Subject: RE: [Flashcoders] Faster code? >>> >> >>> >>Thanks. >>> >> >>> >>Jason Merrill | E-Learning Solutions | icfconsulting.com >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>-----Original Message----- >>> >>>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:flashcoders- >>> >>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul BH >>> >>>>Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 11:31 AM >>> >>>>To: Flashcoders mailing list >>> >>>>Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Faster code? >>> >>>> >>> >>>>this is the tool I meant - visDoc / ASDoc were these once the same? >>> >>>>cant remember... Im having a slow day... >>> >>>> >>> >>>>http://www.visiblearea.com/visdoc/ >>> >>>> >>> >>>>On 12/23/05, Merrill, Jason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>>> Where can I get ASDoc? Google seems pretty ignorant of it - at >>> >>least as >>> >>>>> a product or software tool. Or is it an internal-only product >>> Adobe >>> >>>>> uses? Or is it simply a Macromedia standardized HTML format for >>> >>help >>> >>>>> content? >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> Jason Merrill | E-Learning Solutions | icfconsulting.com >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>-----Original Message----- >>> >>>>> >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> >>[mailto:flashcoders- >>> >>>>> >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of JesterXL >>> >>>>> >>Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 10:56 AM >>> >>>>> >>To: Flashcoders mailing list >>> >>>>> >>Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Faster code? >>> >>>>> >> >>> >>>>> >>Oh yeah definatly. Even though Natural Doc's syntax feels more >>> >>>>> >>straightforward, ASDoc definately has the most beautiful output >>> >>that >>> >>>>> I've >>> >>>>> >>seen to date. >>> >>>>> >> >>> >>>>> >>----- Original Message ----- >>> >>>>> >>From: "Paul BH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>>>> >>To: "Flashcoders mailing list" >>> <flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com> >>> >>>>> >>Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 10:53 AM >>> >>>>> >>Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Faster code? >>> >>>>> >> >>> >>>>> >> >>> >>>>> >>1) I agree, that's why back to my earlier thing, I rarely >>> comment >>> >>- >>> >>>>> >>what ASDoc does do however is provide a way of displaying things >>> >>like >>> >>>>> >>your method signature in a friendly HTML like manner, with a >>> handy >>> >>>>> >>index down the side. When I do comment, it would be to explain >>> >>some >>> >>>>> >>hackery, or something that wasnt obvious - within a function, >>> this >>> >>>>> >>wouldnt get picked up, if it was something like a paramenter >>> only >>> >>>>> >>being in an allowable range, I would comment that in a way that >>> >>ASDoc >>> >>>>> >>picks up... >>> >>>>> >> >>> >>>>> >>2)Hehe if I couldnt do that, it would be nirvana-esque... I >>> never >>> >>said >>> >>>>> >>that this document wouldnt change - the key thing here is to >>> make >>> >>sure >>> >>>>> >>that the change is captured in one place and one place alone... >>> ie >>> >>- >>> >>>>> >>when business changes the specification, this is reflected in my >>> >>unit >>> >>>>> >>tests (as they are one & the same document), and thus my test >>> >>suite >>> >>>>> >>know about it straight away... >>> >>>>> >> >>> >>>>> >>On 12/23/05, JesterXL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>>> >>> 1. ASDoc just generates comments from your code. If your >>> code >>> >>>>> comments >>> >>>>> >>> aren't up to date, neither is your generated asdocs. >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>>> >>> 2. If you could coerce a client to sign a document saying that >>> >>>>> business >>> >>>>> >>> requirements never change... hell dude, I'm hiring you >>> fulltime >>> >>to >>> >>>>> work >>> >>>>> >>> for >>> >>>>> >>> me! >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> >>>>> >>> From: "Paul BH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>>>> >>> To: "Flashcoders mailing list" >>> >><flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com> >>> >>>>> >>> Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 10:31 AM >>> >>>>> >>> Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Faster code? >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>>> >>> I'm so glad I opened such a juicy can of worms just before >>> >>Christmas >>> >>>>> ;) >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>>> >>> I just want to throw one more thing into the mix before I >>> >>dissappear >>> >>>>> off >>> >>>>> >>> to >>> >>>>> >>> numb >>> >>>>> >>> my family reunion with hefty doses of alcohol... >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>>> >>> So, now I think my comments before about, erm comments still >>> >>stand. >>> >>>>> I >>> >>>>> >>> see comments differently to documentation, so I'll just add my >>> >>>>> >>> tuppence to this and retire to eat drink & be merry... >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>>> >>> I think some (many)? people dont document because they cant be >>> >>>>> arsed. >>> >>>>> >>> Why is this the case? We'll, again, I think it comes down to >>> >>>>> changing >>> >>>>> >>> requirements, and the fact that I hate having the same >>> >>information >>> >>>>> in >>> >>>>> >>> two places, as at some point one will get out of date... >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>>> >>> How to manage this, and at the same time make your code easy >>> to >>> >>>>> >>> understand? >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>>> >>> This is how we are approaching it / looking to approach it... >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>>> >>> 1) Documentation of individual methods within classes is done >>> >>using >>> >>>>> >>> ASDoc which gets triggered whenever a file gets checked into >>> >>source >>> >>>>> >>> control -- your documentataion is generated from your class >>> >>file, >>> >>>>> and >>> >>>>> >>> is *always* up to date with your checked in class file... >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>>> >>> 2) We are looking into using a thing called FIT >>> >>(http://fit.c2.com/) >>> >>>>> >>> What this does is tie in business requirements with unit >>> tests. >>> >>The >>> >>>>> >>> business (ie the client) basically write their specifications >>> >>(or >>> >>>>> are >>> >>>>> >>> assisted with it) in a word document. wherever a table is >>> >>>>> encountered, >>> >>>>> >>> this is interpreted by FIT as a unit test, and the test >>> builder >>> >>>>> writes >>> >>>>> >>> a fixture to accomodate that test... What this means is that >>> you >>> >>are >>> >>>>> >>> documenting your business logic in one place (rather than both >>> a >>> >>>>> specs >>> >>>>> >>> document and a slew of unit tests) >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>>> >>> For me, the underlying principle is this -- DONT REPEAT >>> YOURSELF >>> >>-- >>> >>>>> >>> it'll save you a whole truckload of hassles down the road... >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>>> >>> Pxx >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>>> >>> On 12/23/05, Hans Wichman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>>> >>> > Just to those that are reading this thread and wondering if >>> >>>>> writing neat >>> >>>>> >>> > documented code for clients (and payed for by clients) is an >>> >>>>> illusion, >>> >>>>> >>> > my >>> >>>>> >>> > 2 >>> >>>>> >>> > cents: >>> >>>>> >>> > >>> >>>>> >>> > we've been working on a project (complete virtual learning >>> >>city) >>> >>>>> in >>> >>>>> >>> > flash >>> >>>>> >>> > in which the client didnt really know what he wanted up >>> front, >>> >>>>> which we >>> >>>>> >>> > tackled using a usecase-development/prototyping approach. >>> >>>>> >>> > The object oriented design was by large thought up up front, >>> >>the >>> >>>>> >>> > conversion >>> >>>>> >>> > of this design to AS2.0 was done bit by bit, using unit >>> >>testing >>> >>>>> etc. All >>> >>>>> >>> > the while the specs where changing and we made >>> >>>>> this-phase/next-phase >>> >>>>> >>> > choices and did a small impact analysis for most of them. >>> >>>>> >>> > During implementation most of the code was being documented >>> >>>>> already >>> >>>>> >>> > (during >>> >>>>> >>> > or upfront), not using obvious what-does-this-button-do >>> >>comments, >>> >>>>> but >>> >>>>> >>> > WHY-does-this-button-do-what-it-does comments. The internals >>> >>>>> workings >>> >>>>> >>> > may >>> >>>>> >>> > change, but why-it-does-what-it-does usually doesnt. The >>> >>client >>> >>>>> now >>> >>>>> >>> > requested ALL documentation to be delivered as a separate >>> >>product, >>> >>>>> most >>> >>>>> >>> > of >>> >>>>> >>> > which is already present and includes functional docs, >>> >>technical >>> >>>>> docs, >>> >>>>> >>> > source docs, readers, etc. >>> >>>>> >>> > This product will run for a number of years, currently 4 >>> >>virtual >>> >>>>> >>> > casestudies have been implemented and 50 more will be >>> required >>> >>>>> over the >>> >>>>> >>> > next few years (casestudy == adventure game). A number of >>> >>people >>> >>>>> are >>> >>>>> >>> > working on this project together, ussually not having a clue >>> >>what >>> >>>>> the >>> >>>>> >>> > other >>> >>>>> >>> > one does, they just agree on a common interface for example >>> >>>>> between >>> >>>>> >>> > client >>> >>>>> >>> > and server (which is documented by examples mostly). >>> >>>>> >>> > Lots of changes will probably be required, but since the >>> code >>> >>is >>> >>>>> >>> > modular, >>> >>>>> >>> > its clean (99,9%) and well documented, we can analyse what >>> has >>> >>to >>> >>>>> be >>> >>>>> >>> > refactored and what doesnt need to be. >>> >>>>> >>> > >>> >>>>> >>> > This is not to start up the discussion again whether or not >>> to >>> >>>>> document >>> >>>>> >>> > your code, just to tell you that almost all our clients (our >>> >>>>> company has >>> >>>>> >>> > about 50 ppl and a lot of clients) request a solid design, >>> >>solid >>> >>>>> >>> > documentation and a copy of the sourcecode. Internally we >>> are >>> >>all >>> >>>>> >>> > expected >>> >>>>> >>> > to have a high standard and work on increasing this standard >>> >>even >>> >>>>> >>> > further >>> >>>>> >>> > (for example by reading books such as 'code complete', >>> taking >>> >>>>> >>> > certifications, studying oo development). This is the same >>> for >>> >>>>> java, >>> >>>>> >>> > php, >>> >>>>> >>> > AS1, AS2, visual basic or c++ developers. >>> >>>>> >>> > >>> >>>>> >>> > Does the way we work slow us down? No. >>> >>>>> >>> > Does the way we work cost us clients? Nope. >>> >>>>> >>> > Does everything need to be documented? No ofcourse not. >>> >>>>> >>> > Is this approach applicable to all types of projects? Nope. >>> >>>>> >>> > Will we hire someone who is fast but does not document his >>> >>crappy >>> >>>>> code, >>> >>>>> >>> > again? We surely wont, and we know becoz we review his code >>> >>after >>> >>>>> each >>> >>>>> >>> > project. >>> >>>>> >>> > >>> >>>>> >>> > I do think lots of the arguments given here against >>> >>documenting >>> >>>>> are just >>> >>>>> >>> > excuses in order not to have to, or a lack of skill in the >>> oo >>> >>>>> design >>> >>>>> >>> > area. Rewriting and rewriting and rewriting (with or >>> without >>> >>>>> >>> > documentation) should make warnings bells go off in your >>> head, >>> >>>>> with or >>> >>>>> >>> > without someone paying for it. >>> >>>>> >>> > Can I do the same very cool things all the >>> >>>>> non-documenting-guru/hackers >>> >>>>> >>> > do? >>> >>>>> >>> > Nah unfortunately not, but thats beside the point ;). >>> >>>>> >>> > >>> >>>>> >>> > When it comes down to it, I agree you have to pragmatic when >>> >>>>> coding, not >>> >>>>> >>> > everything we do has to have an academic standard, but you >>> >>>>> shouldn't >>> >>>>> >>> > grab >>> >>>>> >>> > every opportunity to write crappy code with both hands >>> either. >>> >>>>> >>> > >>> >>>>> >>> > Just my 2 cents... >>> >>>>> >>> > H >>> >>>>> >>> > >>> >>>>> >>> > >>> >>>>> >>> > At 08:51 AM 12/23/2005, you wrote: >>> >>>>> >>> > >>I think it reflects the nature of flash and its history. >>> >>>>> >>> > > Not to mention the diverse skillset of its >>> >>developer-base. A >>> >>>>> lot of >>> >>>>> >>> > > people learned to write code in Flash, and the question of >>> >>>>> whether >>> >>>>> >>> > > they >>> >>>>> >>> > > are doing it the "right" way or not is debatable. >>> >>>>> >>> > > >>> >>>>> >>> > >>In other words, as flash becomes a real software >>> development >>> >>>>> platform, >>> >>>>> >>> > >>real development methodologies will become more important. >>> >>>>> >>> > > That's really what it comes down to. As you start >>> >>building >>> >>>>> >>> > > longer-term >>> >>>>> >>> > > projects and using standardized methodologies, these >>> things >>> >>>>> start to >>> >>>>> >>> > > become more important. I still do the occasional one-off >>> >>>>> animation or >>> >>>>> >>> > > ad, >>> >>>>> >>> > > but that's not where I spend the majority of my time these >>> >>days. >>> >>>>> >>> > > >>> >>>>> >>> > >ryanm >>> >>>>> >>> > >_______________________________________________ >>> >>>>> >>> > >Flashcoders mailing list >>> >>>>> >>> > >Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com >>> >>>>> >>> > >http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders >>> >>>>> >>> > >>> >>>>> >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> >>>>> >>> > Flashcoders mailing list >>> >>>>> >>> > Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com >>> >>>>> >>> > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders >>> >>>>> >>> > >>> >>>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> >>>>> >>> Flashcoders mailing list >>> >>>>> >>> Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com >>> >>>>> >>> http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> >>>>> >>> Flashcoders mailing list >>> >>>>> >>> Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com >>> >>>>> >>> http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>>> >>_______________________________________________ >>> >>>>> >>Flashcoders mailing list >>> >>>>> >>Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com >>> >>>>> >>http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders >>> >>>>> >> >>> >>>>> >>_______________________________________________ >>> >>>>> >>Flashcoders mailing list >>> >>>>> >>Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com >>> >>>>> >>http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders >>> >>>>> NOTICE: >>> >>>>> This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain >>> >>privileged or >>> >>>>confidential information. If you have received it in error, please >>> >>notify the sender >>> >>>>immediately and delete the original. Any other use of this e-mail by >>> >>you is >>> >>>>prohibited. >>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>> >>>>> Flashcoders mailing list >>> >>>>> Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com >>> >>>>> http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>_______________________________________________ >>> >>>>Flashcoders mailing list >>> >>>>Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com >>> >>>>http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders >>> >>_______________________________________________ >>> >>Flashcoders mailing list >>> >>Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com >>> >>http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Flashcoders mailing list >>> Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com >>> http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders >>> >>_______________________________________________ >>Flashcoders mailing list >>Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com >>http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders _______________________________________________ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
