We used Adobe's endorsed/recommended way. Got a lot of problems... 1- passing objects between modules. 2 - some developers bad pratices, like create a new instance of another module instead use ModuleLoader. 3 - bad control of what code is from what module.
And others diary problems. Now I compile on FB without optimizing (generating big swf files) and, when I release using maven I use link-reports on Application and load-extern on Modules to get smaller swf files. VELO On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 9:58 AM, ben.clinkinbeard < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Separate projects is my preference and seems logical to me but is not > really endorsed/recommended by Adobe which is disappointing. The > compiler arguments you mentioned can be used to optimize but > FlexBuilder is flaky at best using that approach. See > https://bugs.adobe.com/jira/browse/FB-12220 for example. That thread > also talks a bit about their recommended approach which, again, I am > not crazy about. > > HTH, > Ben > > > --- In [email protected] <flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>, "Richard > Rodseth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I can't seem to find much about the pros and cons of having a separate > > FlexBuilder project for each module in a modular, extensible app. It > > seems you lose the Optimize For Application menu option, but can work > > around that with compiler arguments. Besides, I don't think that's > > appropriate in my case. > > > > Any opinions on best practices? > > > > >
