All AMF/RemoteObject API worked with that. And our AMF/RemoteObject
implementation in Royale does the same. In fact we already have FaultEvent
and Result Event... why don't use it? seems to me more complicated to
change it to no use that...
Our code relies heavily in AMF so all that classes are in lots of code to
manage the use of the incoming data for the server and that data is what
gives the result object from the backend to the client to manage it,

2018-02-19 23:00 GMT+01:00 Gabe Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com>:

> I don’t use AMF, but I have no idea why you need specially typed events
> for that.
>
> Maybe I’m missing something…
>
> On Feb 19, 2018, at 11:38 PM, Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Harbs
>
> 2018-02-15 10:53 GMT+01:00 Gabe Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com>:
>>
>> None of the cases where I had ResultEvent and FaultEvent really made a
>> lot of sense to keep that logic in Royale (events should generally be of
>> type Event), so keeping those events would just mask places where code
>> should probably be rewritten.
>>
>>
> I think you was not using AMF. With RemoteObjects, I think Fault and
> Result events are a must or at least I can't imagine a way to handle the
> async behavior in other way. Maybe your scenario was different right?
>
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira
>
>
>


-- 
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira

Reply via email to