On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Erik de Bruin <e...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote:
> It seems you needed to make changes to VanillaSDK to make it work with > Jangaroo. What alternative for the 'goog' UI framework will you be > using on the AMD side? > The only change to VanillaSDK is that I removed the dependency on the goog library. I didn't "need" to make that change to make it work with Jangaroo, it just didn't seem to make much sense to remove goog for the class setup, but keep it just to create a DOM element and attach an event listener (VanillaJS can do that quite well). And since your prototype didn't work in IE8 (mode) anyway, nothing was lost. As discussed in the thread "[ASJS] Integration with existing JS libraries and components", the AMD solution integrates well with *any* JavaScript library. So if you wanted to use AMD plus goog UI, that would be possible, too. The other thread contains some details on what possibilities you have to "shim" an existing library that does not natively support AMD, and discusses proposals for a [Native] annotation. I also mentioned on that thread that we (= CoreMedia) use Ext JS as the UI component library (and DOM abstraction). It is possible to instantiate Ext JS components (or any other Ext JS objects) from ActionScript and MXML, as well as to subclass existing components. You virtually do not notice that Ext's components are implemented in JavaScript, not in ActionScript. One thing I asked myself when I looked at your VanillaSDK code is why you checked in the JavaScript code of the framework classes (everything but Example.as). Aren't they written in AS3 and cross-compiled, too? At least that's how I thought you'd do it, even if this code is never compiled to run in the FlashPlayer or AIR. Take into account that you are intending to implement a complete UI component framework, you wouldn't want to do that in JavaScript directly, would you? Greetings -Frank-
