I was already aware of that, but forgoing the use of UIComponents is not really
an option for me.
I don't see why the Flex team couldn't build a minimal set of defaults into
the Application class that would allow it to be used outside of MXML. But
absent that, I think the API docs should clearly indicate that the only
practical way to instantiate and use the class is through MXML.
Alex Harui <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Not all applications have to have mx:Application at the top
level. You can start with Sprite if you want. Thats what happens when you
create an ActionScript project in Flex Builder. But then you cant use most of
the mx: components.
---------------------------------
From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave
Glasser
Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2007 2:06 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Application without MXML: Is it possible?
I looked at the generated actionscript and it does look like there's a
lot going on, and it's not worth trying to make it work without MXML. Maybe
I'll log a bug report requesting that they say in the API doc that the
Application class can only (as a practical matter) be used via the
<mx:Application> MXML tag.
hank williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is what I'm trying to do impossible, at least without adding some
amount of setup code that is normally generated by the MXML preprocessor and
isn't documented anywhere? __
As I understand it, this is exactly correct. If you compile an MXML
with the option on that generates actionscript (I forget how you do
this) you will see a lot of generated code even in an MXML hello
world.
Regards,
Han
