@Om, I think people misunderstand what I've demoed here. The demo was a very quick and dirty proof of concept. An experiment I didn't want to spend too much time on - because too much investment at this time might be lost when we get to the other side of the AS"next" cataclysm.
I could have subclassed viewStack and dealt with transitions there, solving any synch problems the way I do in MadComponents. But I went with a quick lash-up. My intention for MC3D"next" is to fully integrate Stage3D capabilities into MadComponents. Maybe you've noticed that my Stage3D MC3D classes aren't fully integrated into MadComponents. If you think that they're bolted on the side - you'd be right. And there's a good reason for this. Stage3D is bolted on the side of AS3. The further that I get into work-arounds, the more I'm probably wasting effort on matters that will hopefully be resolved in AS"next" anyway. I have a lot of display-list Sprite.graphics drawing going on right now. And unrestricted styling of display-list text. I'm hoping that AS"next" will provide new vector graphics and text classes for Stage3D - and if it does, re-writing my existing component rendering code might be straightforward. And I might not need a geometric renderer work-around after all. But I don't know yet. Personally, I wouldn't invest too much effort in a new framework now. ( Unless, you're on a beta programme for AS"next" that I don't know about ). For me, there are too many unknowns right now. If I were you, I would plan to work on this intensely on this as soon as an AS"next" beta programme kicks off. Om, I've come onto this forum being completely honest about my intentions. And people don't like my attitude. It is my intention deliver MC3D"next". Not Flex"next". My idea is to offer these classes as the basis for Flex"next" - if you want. On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 9:04 AM, Om <bigosma...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:30 AM, Daniel Freeman <madcompone...@gmail.com > >wrote: > > > I've done some experiments with Stage3D accelerated Flex components, > > derived from MadComponents classes. > > > > > > > http://madskool.wordpress.com/2013/01/21/madcomponents3d-part5-stage3d-accelerated-flex/ > > > > It is my intention to port MadComponents to AS"next". I propose that > these > > ported MadComponents/MC3D classes might form the basis of a new Flex > mobile > > framework that utilises hardware GPU rendering. > > > > I'm aware that Thibault Imbert has proposed that a new Flex framework > > should be based on Starling and Feathers. But I believe that the MC3D > > approach is better suited to the next Flex mobile framework. > > > > MadComponents is a fully fledged framework, not just a UI framework. It > > allows for versatile styling of components (without having to design > > texture skins), server communication, and memory management. > > > > However, until we know more about AS"next", which framework approach to > > choose is mostly speculation. > > > > So I'd like the members of this group to read my blog post, and let me > know > > what they think. > > > > > Daniel, > > Thanks for your interest in helping out Apache Flex! > > I have been following Madcomponents and your blog for a while now. I > looked your example in your "stage3d accelerated flex" post [1]. While > that is good for a nice looking demo, I dont think that the approach you > suggest can be used to support an real framework like Flex. > > Whenever I see a reference to FlexGlobals.topLevelApplication anywhere in a > component's code, I always think of it as a hackish workaround trying to > cover up for the lack of a good design. More specifically, this approach > would blow up when there are two instances (Lists in your example) on the > stage and we try to animate both of them at the same time or at a slight > lag. The topLevelApplication goes invisible, the first List does its thing > on the gpu, then sets the topLevelApplication to be visible. Now, if the > second component had already started the transition, it would expect the > topLevelApplication to be invisible while it runs. But the first component > would have made it visible because it had finished running. This would > cause quite serious rendering issues to say the least. > > While I have your attention, I would like to talk about another blog post > of yours that I had bookmarked a while ago [2] Here, you talk about > building a set of UI components from scratch that would directly draw to > Stage3D (no starling or anything in between) I think that your example and > your approach made a lot of sense. If you have been following the thread > [3], we are talking about a brand new flex framework designed from scratch. > This is where I am planning to spend my time on for the next few months. > My hope was to start building a graphics rendering layer that draws > directly to Stage3D, much like how you mention in the blog post. Is this > something you can help out with? This approach would set us free of the > shackles of the current Flex framework - which frankly needs a lot of > rework and/or hacks to support Stage3D. > > Regards, > Om > > > [1] > > http://code.google.com/p/mad-components/source/browse/trunk/FlexMadComponents/src/FlexMadPageTransitions.mxml > [2] > > http://madskool.wordpress.com/2012/04/10/drawing-madcomponents-with-stage3d/ > [3] http://markmail.org/message/yjykc72a7qeoootr >
