Heh I was having this discussion a couple of days ago. There are several
limitations in the way, the biggest being that there are no objects in Flash
4. It wouldn't be AS2, but a subset of.
- Every class would need to be compiled as a named instance of a Movie Clip
on stage on frame 1.
- new Class() would be converted to duplicateMovieClip() for above class.
- ALL deferencing in Flash Lite 1.1 is done with eval() (i.e. path strings),
even though in the IDE you can enter dot syntax, this is converted to
tellTarget, setProperty etc at compile time.
- Buttons are the only way to receive KB input in FL1.1, so you'd have to
create a complex button handler from your Key listener in your AS2 code,
this would quickly get very complicated.
- Class methods can only be executed from frame labels via
call("mcName:methodName"), which works great for static methods, but not so
flexible for anything else (you need to strip out the mc name from the
_target property of the movie clip with a custom string function as
substring() is the only one you get.
- I gave up at this point, head was spinning.
Also, it has been public knowledge for a while now that Flash Lite 2 will be
based on FP7 (therefore AS2). So it just depends on how quickly this could
be implemented to make a use for in in the coming say 6-8 months before we
see FL2.
Tricky. Not really sure it would speed up development time either, Flash 4
code is so simple compared to even AS1, and we are tied in to faking
functionality by more physical means (a frame loop is literally that, 2
frames, as opposed to an onEnterFrame function), that the IDE is probably
the best place to work.
One other thing is that Flash 4 syntax leaves very little to go wrong, there
aren't so many silent failures, the IDE will even throw an error if you try
to set a property on a movie clip that doesn't exist (does this even happen
in Flash 6??). So debugging time is minimal, and it is very satisfying to
work with as the results are a lot quicker than prototyping in any other AS
version. Nice to go back to every so often.
Wonderful idea though, if we were stuck with FL1.1 for say over a year, I'd
definitely give this a bash, most likely in JSFL rather than asking for a
split in MTASCs direction.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of daniele |
> mentegrafica.it
> Sent: 16 July 2005 10:22
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [osflash] MTASC for FlashLite
>
> Hello all!
>
> I saw the great job by Nicolas in porting the MTASC compiling
> also for player8.
>
> Is it "stupid" thinking to develop a MTASC version for the
> FlashLite 1.1 player ?
>
> I know that developing for flashLite is a stupid and
> time-consuming process [ using flash4 syntax sucks ], but
> maybe writing in AS2.0 and converting for FlashLite bytecode
> could help developers work more on the flash enabled mobiles.
>
> What do you think ?
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> dott. daniele galiffa
> multimedia designer and developer
> Macromedia FlashMX Developer Certified
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> _______________________________________________
> osflash mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
_______________________________________________
osflash mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
