i assume t am going to try them both . On Fri, Sep 28, 2018, 6:29 AM Carlos Rovira <[email protected]> wrote:
> Not sure, the fact is Typescript is doing for JS what AS3 did for AS, and > now they are legion. People reports me happy with the stack React + > TypeScript. That's the reality right now, and we should not negate. In the > other hand we can have our space, since we don't need to have the languages > and tech more adopted. In fact, JS is popular since anyone can use it, but > in my case (business apps) would be nightmare to do directly with JS... > > El vie., 28 sept. 2018 a las 12:08, Ramazan Ergüder Bekrek (< > [email protected]>) escribió: > >> Trust me they will come back! >> >> >> 27.09.2018, 12:53, "Fréderic Cox" <[email protected]>: >> >> Hi Alex, >> >> Correct, I'm not going away from MXML nor Actionscript at all because I >> know about the advantages and workflows I love so much. The reality here is >> that we don't find a lot of AS3 developers anymore though, that is a small >> concern I have at the moment. :) >> >> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 3:00 AM Alex Harui <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi Fréderic, >> >> >> >> I understand you now. Royale should be a good choice as it can be >> thought of exactly as you are thinking of it: a lighterweight Flex-like >> SDK that can output to JS. >> >> >> >> I thought that you were trying to get away from MXML and ActionScript as >> well. I think there are so many advantages to working with a structured >> language. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> -Alex >> >> >> >> *From: *Fréderic Cox <[email protected]> >> *Reply-To: *"[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> *Date: *Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 12:56 PM >> *To: *"[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> *Subject: *Re: Evaluating Apache Royale for the long term >> >> >> >> Hi Alex, >> >> >> >> Two main reasons: >> >> >> >> 1) Being able to have the source compile to JS, since that is what >> everyone is doing lately :-) I don't want to exclude my source code from >> future projects by not using JS >> >> >> >> 2) Flex is more "bloated" than Royale (PAYG), so I think in the long term >> it will be better to have more performant code. >> >> >> >> Correct me if I'm wrong :-) >> >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 9:01 PM Alex Harui <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi Fréderic, >> >> >> >> That’s interesting. What is it about Flex that you want to get away from? >> >> >> >> I suppose you can load the JS into a webview, but I think you might need >> some more glue to have the JS access the Native Extension. But I think >> that you can write such glue. Not sure how efficient it will be. >> >> >> >> -Alex >> >> >> >> *From: *Fréderic Cox <[email protected]> >> *Reply-To: *"[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> *Date: *Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 11:39 AM >> *To: *"[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> *Subject: *Re: Evaluating Apache Royale for the long term >> >> >> >> Hi Alex, >> >> >> >> I'm trying to go look into a path to get away from Flex rather than AIR. >> Most of my apps are desktop based, and the ones that are browser based we >> are loading into an AIR container (directly loading the SWF) anyway. >> >> >> >> So I guess I can use royale and then load the resulting JS into a webview >> in AIR? That way I can still use native extensions? >> >> >> >> I spent some time trying Apache Royale today but it will take me many >> more days before I really get used and experienced in it but I'll try to >> help where I can. Lot's of stuff to learn about it first but it looks >> really promising. >> >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 6:09 PM Alex Harui <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi Fréderic, >> >> >> >> Just so I’m clear, are all of your apps AIR apps and not browser apps? >> If so, and you want to get away from AIR, then you will have to decide on >> how to run the resulting JS. Royale has support for Cordova and Node. I >> haven’t done much with Node, so not sure how much graphical UI you could do >> there. I think you can also use Chromium Embedded as well. >> >> >> >> You will need to pick your runtime environment first. I will assume the >> Browser is not one of your choices, but there may be a way to use it, I >> don’t know. I’m not sure there is a 100% equivalent to AIR. I think >> you’ll always have to trade-off some feature or build missing capabilities. >> >> >> >> Regarding Native Extensions: I believe each runtime environment has a >> way to call native code. So, your Native Extensions probably can’t be used >> as-is, but the code that actually does the work can probably be re-used to >> some extent. For example, if you chose Cordova, you can probably make a >> Cordova plugin using some of that Native Extension code. >> >> >> >> I think each runtime environment also has a way to launch other apps and >> access files. Cordova has a File plugin and we have some examples that use >> it. A volunteer could make a more Flex-like wrapper for it. >> >> >> >> AMF works in lots of places but there are probably still bugs. I don’t >> see any reason it wouldn’t eventually work for your app. >> >> >> >> TourDeFlex uses modules. It can load modules now. Royale does not >> support unloading modules because the runtime environments don’t make it >> easy to remove loaded code. As I get more of TourDeFlex working and other >> people get their apps working we will get a better idea of how important >> “stuck code” is. Unloading the instances of objects created by module code >> will likely be far more important, and that cleanup generally needs to be >> done whether the code unloads or not. Also, because Royale doesn’t >> currently support embedding, the size of the loaded module may not be as >> significant. >> >> >> >> There hasn’t been a lot of attention paid to Royale outside of the >> browser, so expect to run into more issues, but we do have intentions of >> getting it all to work. We expect you and other volunteers to contribute >> to making it work by contributing code and patches. If you do enough of >> that, you will probably be granted committer status, and then you have much >> more control over Royale in the long term. >> >> >> >> HTH, >> >> -Alex >> >> >> >> >> >> *From: *Fréderic Cox <[email protected]> >> *Reply-To: *"[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> *Date: *Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 2:31 AM >> *To: *"[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> *Subject: *Evaluating Apache Royale for the long term >> >> >> >> Hi guys, >> >> >> >> Finally you have my full attention :-) I am spending the remainder of >> this week (at least) to evaluate using Apache Royale for our company's >> apps. I'm evaluating wether it is a good course to convert our existing >> flex apps (which currently target Mac OSX, Windows and iOS using Adobe AIR). >> >> >> >> I have a couple of early questions after installing VSCode and Josh's >> AS/MXML extension. >> >> >> >> Our apps are pretty complex, using things like: >> >> >> >> * Modules (one application uses ModuleLoader quite heavily) >> >> * Accessing user's hard disk to manipulate files >> >> * AMFPHP for communication with PHP backend >> >> * NativeProcess API to convert images using a compiled version of >> ImageMagick (so accessing .exe files and mac executable scripts) >> >> * NativeExtensions >> >> >> >> Can this all be used with ApacheRoyale? >> >> >> >> Thanks for the information, I'm going to experiment with the examples and >> try to convert some parts of apps to see where this is going. >> >> >> >> Best regards, >> >> >> >> Fréderic >> >> >> >> >> >> > > -- > Carlos Rovira > http://about.me/carlosrovira > >
