On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Michael Schmalle <apa...@teotigraphix.com>wrote:
> > Quoting Frank Wienberg <fr...@jangaroo.net>: > > > >> >>> I'm looking forward to seeing the Falcon implementation of your >>> AMD/RequireJS ideas and it's output, so we can compare the various >>> suggested approaches on their technical merits as well as their >>> theoretical underpinnings. >>> >>> >>> Okay, we can wait for that, but since Michael says what I did with >> Jangaroo >> 3 is easily re-implemented in Falcon, why not compare now? The output >> will/should be very very similar to what the Jangaroo 3 output looks like >> now, e.g. the one of the Open Flash Chart example. >> Another idea would be I take your example code (or any other code you >> want) >> and compile it with Jangaroo 3 and also deploy the output. What do you >> think? >> >> Greetings >> -Frank- >> >> > I am pretty sure he means, "When Mike implements this in FalconJx, we con > compare" ;-) > Sorry if I missed a joke, but I was saying the opposite, why not compare now? Why does it have to be implemented in FalconJx when we discuss/compare the output format, not the compile process? > MXML is going to wait, I did a bit bit, put some hooks in but there is > more pressing things I want to spend my time on, this is one and the other > is what Roland just announced for discussion with the compiler. > So do we really only compare the approaches by the resulting performance? That would be sad. There are many other factors: * Code size * Modularity (= do you have to re-compile class B if class A changed?) * Development turn-around effort * Complexity of solution * ... These should all be regarded before a final decision for one or the other. Greetings -Frank-
