"14 000 lines of codes for UIComponent" is not only hurting the performance, but also scare developers away from looking into it, the 1st version of Flex was 2004, and the architecture has not been changed essentially: everything jammed together.
When I looked into Java Spring Framework's growth, especially from Spring2 to Spring3, modularization gives developer great freedom to choose which feature/function/module to use. I try to build a pure data model with IList to drive a pure AS UI, I can't exclude all the UI component from Flex!!, it's like Windows and Explore, except not really. Thanks. -Gary On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Alex Harui <[email protected]> wrote: > It will be interesting to see if FlexJS on mobile is faster. Peter is > working on a mobile app right now. > > -Alex > ________________________________________ > From: After24 [[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, April 2, 2014 3:12 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Coding a better flex mobile app > > Hello, > > From my personal experience, it's not possible to get a super fluid app > using flex mobile (especially on mid range phones and tablets). I think > this > perception is mainly due to the list component which never reaches 50/60 > fps > even when its itemRender is well optimized. > > I know that this need of smoothness is very subjective, but for me it's > essential and greatly improves the user experience and the pleasure to use > an app. > I understand that the flex framework wasn't originally designed to run on > mobile devices and that optimizations are limited because of the > architecture of the framework (14 000 lines of codes for UIComponent for > example). I'm absolutely not complaining about it and the situation is > going > better and better with new generations of mobile devices. > > But for now I'm forced to choose other solutions to get a fluid mobile app, > to be specific I use : > > - Starling > - Feather UI > - Robotleg > - AS3 signal > > I'm very happy with the result but frankly, the choice between this stack > and flex will be a no brainer if flex was able to perform as well on > mobile. > This is the trap with flex, it's so good and easy to develop with it that > others solutions, even if they works well, are very far from approaching > the > ease of working with flex :-) > > One more time, it's not a criticism, I'm absolutely not complaining, it's > just my personal opinion about flex on mobile. > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://apache-flex-users.2333346.n4.nabble.com/Coding-a-better-flex-mobile-app-tp5888p5895.html > Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
