swf9 is still supported, just not a standard default any more. The nightlies include swf9 libraries and you can still specify it as a target runtime. There is very little (if any) difference in our runtime code between swf9/10, it's just that if you compile with swf10 as the target, it enables many Flash API's that are not available in 9.
Please file a Jira bug if you can give us a test case, as it was not our intent to break swf9. On 2010-01-08, at 17:34, Chris Kohlhardt wrote: > I just gave the nightly build a quick spin, and immediately ran into > rendering issues which I assume are related to SWF9.... Is SWF9 support > going away? > > We have decided not to adopt SWF10 yet because we have customers who are in > the 'Enterprise' and the data we have suggests Flash 10 adoption is still > far less than 90% there. I think the Adobe numbers are misleading ( > http://www.adobe.com/products/player_census/flashplayer/enterprise_penetration.html) > and the analytics on our web site suggest Flash 10 has maybe 80% > penetration. > > -chris > > On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Henry Minsky <[email protected]>wrote: > >> We just made some changes to significantly reduce the RAM required for >> SWF9/10 compiles. You can try them out in >> a nightly build, and tell us if you see any improvement (or any new bugs, >> god forbid) >> >> regarding the 'incremental compile' option, If you compile from the command >> line, the incremental option will be useless right now, since the >> cache it stores is in RAM. If run on the server, I don't know if it makes >> any difference either, it's really >> just a placeholder feature now and does not have an efficient >> implementation, it requires more work to be optimized to make much >> difference. >> >> >> >> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 4:39 PM, Chris Kohlhardt <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> After a good amount of work, we've managed to get our application >>> completely migrated to OL4.6.1 and SWF9. >>> >>> Thank you very much to everyone involved in making the SWF9 runtime a >>> reality. The performance of Gliffy is so much faster now, it's almost >>> unbelievable. We're entering QA next week, and we expect to release SWF9 >>> Gliffy in mid December. >>> >>> One thing we noticed is that compilation of SWF9 is a lot slower. After >>> some digging, we were able to speed things up by: >>> - setting compiler.swf9.incremental=true in lps.properties >>> - allocating at least 2GB of memory to the tomcat instance running the lps >>> - moving developers to a pure 64bit OS (Clint moved to Windows 7 after a >>> long stint with XP) >>> >>> Are there any other performance tips to consider? >>> >>> thx! >>> >>> -chris >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Henry Minsky >> Software Architect >> [email protected] >> >> >>
