AFAIK, no scientific study was done on the differences. IIRC, Mike Labriola did a talk at 360|Flex 2012 on this topic. The session video should be available.
IMO, the biggest difference is data-binding. Probably the second is "generality". Many renderers are pretty simple. If you want to just layout two icons and a label in a row, the MXML might look like: <HGroup><Image/><Image/><Label/></HGroup> The direct AS equivalent probably isn't much faster, but why use a container and a horizontal layout to manage just three things? Just use the lightest base class you can find, add three children to them and write a simpler layout code. Yes, it is more code for you to write, but the end result is that less code runs. On 9/18/13 2:47 AM, "Kessler CTR Mark J" <[email protected]> wrote: >They are not that much slower with simple usage,. MXML just wires or >sets up things automatically for you even if didn't explicitly set them >up yourself. > >Just don't bog them down either the AS/MXML down. Use things like a >datachange event instead of bindings, contentcache / cacheasbitmap for >the images n such. You probably won't notice a difference. > >-Mark > >-----Original Message----- >From: Cristian Spiescu [mailto:[email protected]] >Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 5:12 AM >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: renderer performance mxml vs actionscript > >Hello, > >I have an additional question regarding this subject, that intrigued me: >why are MXML renderers slower? Aren't they translated to ActionScript >code? > >Thanks. >Best regards, >Cristian. > >On 18.09.2013 09:46, Federico De Maddalena wrote: >> Hi, >> I read in some internet web pages, and someone in this group told me, >> that an item renderer wrote in mxml has worse performance than the same >> renderer wrote in pure actionscript. ok i believe and i trust this, but >> are there studies or analysis that demonstate this thesis? particularly, >> it would be interesting to see a comparison with the results on the >> performance. I don't know if someone has already done this study! >> Bye >> Federico >> >
