> The title of this message says exactly what I mean. Right now we're talking > about cross compiling the Flex SDK > itself, along with all of its components.
No, neither Alex nor I are taking that approach. > The way that TypeScript and Randori/SharpKit integrate with JS is by > declaring some sort of interface which has exactly > the same signatures of their JS counterparts. I think this will quite > probably make the most sense for Apache Flex as well. That's what I'm doing, and what I understand from Alex's approach the same goes for him. I'm building a JS library with the same signature as the Flex SDK, Alex has started a new AS framework and is building a complementary JS framework with the same API. > And we could just use regular actionscript interfaces to do it. Probably > with a small bit of annotation, so, for example, > ... > What we then would need is some sort of compiler support that recognizes > the annotation and automatically includes the > specified .js file. (instead of trying to cross compile the interface) That's exactly what I've done for the Vanilla SDK: it's a Google Closure Library supported JS framework that uses a specific cross compilation implementation in the FalconJx compiler, the 'goog' emitter. > If we want to gain some traction in the HTML world I strongly believe we > need to make friends out there :) And what better way of > making friends than through integrating with them :) The VanillaSDK approach does this for the Closure Library and the way Mike set up make this 'easy'. I've even set up the initial code needed to implement Frank W's "AMD/RequireJS" approach. > Please feel free to call me a fool and tell me my idea is crap, because I > might just be talking out of my ass as usual. :) Not a fool at all, and I like your idea so much that I've already started work on one implementation :-) Hope we can work together to make this the future of Flex! EdB -- Ix Multimedia Software Jan Luykenstraat 27 3521 VB Utrecht T. 06-51952295 I. www.ixsoftware.nl
