Re: RE: [SPAM?] RE: [Flashcoders] XPcomponents set
DepthManager and FocusManager cause a few headaches for people used to working without the MM components. Granted, nowhere near as bad as XP is sounding in this thread, but still... -mark hawley From: Steven Sacks | BLITZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/06/29 Thu PM 02:39:22 CDT To: Flashcoders mailing list flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com Subject: RE: [SPAM?] RE: [Flashcoders] XPcomponents set MM did that as well, did you say scam then too ? With the exception of the DRK series of components, MM's components came free with Flash. And I don't recall any MM components that caused other things to break in your application. The components themselves were buggy and certain components didn't play nicely with others, but they didn't require you to build your application in a very specific way. The scam is not that the XP Components break native Flash code. The scam is that they're not components, it's an entire architecture you must adhere to but they call them components on their website, IMPLYING that they are COMPONENTS not a FRAMEWORK. XPFramework would be honest. ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com -- John Mark Hawley The Nilbog Group 773.968.4980 (cell) ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
Re: RE: [SPAM?] RE: [Flashcoders] XPcomponents set
I think that's false. There are lots of people who are interested in using frameworks and using them completely. We have to agree to disagree on this one. Thinking about it again, I think you're right on one point. There's certainly no reason that using their framework should break native Flash code. That's just sloppy. But, as it is a framework, I think it's totally legit that it makes you do certain things certain ways. It's not like Rails makes other parts of Ruby break. Case in point - to use Rails, you must do things inn VERY specific ways. Rails is all about convention, and if you don't adhere to its conventions, you will be boned. To sum up, my point is that frameworks shouldn't break anything. But also that people should expect when using a framework that they might have to do things in certain ways. Seems obvious, but wasn't clear in my last post... That's all, Jim Kremens On 6/29/06, John Mark Hawley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: DepthManager and FocusManager cause a few headaches for people used to working without the MM components. Granted, nowhere near as bad as XP is sounding in this thread, but still... -mark hawley From: Steven Sacks | BLITZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/06/29 Thu PM 02:39:22 CDT To: Flashcoders mailing list flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com Subject: RE: [SPAM?] RE: [Flashcoders] XPcomponents set MM did that as well, did you say scam then too ? With the exception of the DRK series of components, MM's components came free with Flash. And I don't recall any MM components that caused other things to break in your application. The components themselves were buggy and certain components didn't play nicely with others, but they didn't require you to build your application in a very specific way. The scam is not that the XP Components break native Flash code. The scam is that they're not components, it's an entire architecture you must adhere to but they call them components on their website, IMPLYING that they are COMPONENTS not a FRAMEWORK. XPFramework would be honest. ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com -- John Mark Hawley The Nilbog Group 773.968.4980 (cell) ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com -- Jim Kremens ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
Re: RE: [SPAM?] RE: [Flashcoders] XPcomponents set
Thinking about it again, I think you're right on one point. There's certainly no reason that using their framework should break native Flash code. That's just sloppy. But, as it is a framework, I think it's totally legit that it makes you do certain things certain ways. I wouldn't say XPComponents _breaks_ native code...it just chooses not to use it, abstracting it away into an API that they designed themselves. In my opinion this is perfectly acceptable and maybe even desirable if additional functionality is provided as a result. Scott ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
RE: RE: [SPAM?] RE: [Flashcoders] XPcomponents set
Case in point - to use Rails, you must do things inn VERY specific ways. Rails is all about convention, and if you don't adhere to its conventions, you will be boned. Not true. For example, one of the conventions Rails uses to make things easier is their naming conventions, specifically, pluralization. You make your MySQL database tables plural, like comments. You then name your class Comment and it knows to look in the database for the table named comments. However, you don't have to use this. You can manually override this at the top of your class and point it to the proper table in your database. This is the kind of flexibility and power that come with a well thought out framework. I don't find XP Components to be a very pragmatic framework, and as such, it's not of much use to me. ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
