>>>Obviously this may sound harsh, but because the app you wrote >>>was buggier or harder to build isn't a reflection of the >>>technology in my opinion. > > > It is to me. There are a lot of things you can do with Flex in a day > that would take weeks to do in straight Flash/Actionscript. This is a > fact. For an example, one of the features of the application I worked > on required a Flex-like panel (if you know what I mean by a Flex panel) > to contain content that could be built on the fly, to any size, look, > feel, etc. Flex has a built in Panel renderer to host content. You > create a panel with a single XML statement - takes literally 5 seconds. > To do this in Flash, it required me to build and test a large Panel > class that would scale and render the panel correctly - I won't tell you > how long it took, but it was a lot longer than 45 seconds. The result > was the same, but the time spent was drastically different. Now, the > Actionscript class I built was far more customizable than the Flex one > because I had access to everything that rendered the panel, but I didn't > need all that for the project. That to me is a representation of the > different strengths each app has.
I would say it's far from being an advantage of Flex itself, but more of the component library with MXML representation. The same thing can be done in Flash/ActionScript2. For instance the people of the ActionStep project worked on such an XML representation that could instanciate the UI. Nicolas _______________________________________________ [email protected] To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
