On 9/6/06, P T Withington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think that it is ok to use the class system in the swf kernel, I think of it as "grandfathered in".
Someone writing a new kernel won't use it, probably, but why kill ourselves to massively rip up working code.
But we ought to rewrite the sources to use the new class syntax, so we can get rid of the shim.
[Adding max, henry and laszlo-dev]
On 2006-09-06, at 15:34 EDT, Philip Romanik wrote:
> Hi Tucker,
>
> There are some references to Class from the swf kernel, as well as
> some *.as files that aren't in the kernel ( LzConnection.as for
> example). Does this mean that we need the shim for a while?
Interesting.
Our policy is that the kernel API cannot depend on using our class
model. But I guess that does not preclude using it internally to a
particular kernel.
We really do want to remove the shim, because it is unnecessary
overhead.
The question is, do we not want to use the class declaration in .as
files and/or the kernel? If not, then these need to be rewritten in
js1/as2 classic constructor/prototype pattern.
I think that it is ok to use the class system in the swf kernel, I think of it as "grandfathered in".
Someone writing a new kernel won't use it, probably, but why kill ourselves to massively rip up working code.
But we ought to rewrite the sources to use the new class syntax, so we can get rid of the shim.
Can you give us a list of the files, whether they are in the kernel
or not, and what classes they involve? Then I'll ask Max and Henry
to weigh in on how these should be converted. I'm guessing some will
want to become .lzs files and rewritten to use class declarations,
and some will have to be rewritten in classic style.
--
Henry Minsky
Software Architect
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________ Laszlo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-dev
