Sounds interesting. If one of you can sketch out what the MXML would look like, it would help clarify what you're thinking.
-Alex On 6/8/13 12:13 PM, "Maxime Cowez" <maxime.co...@gmail.com> wrote: >@Carlos: Interesting idea. I had already created a Flex 4 implementation >of >PopUp / Alert that can be used in a declarative way (see >https://github.com/RIAstar/SkinnablePopUpFx). I'll see if I can tweak it >to >leverage your idea; don't think it should be too hard. >Max > > >On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Carlos Rovira ><carlosrov...@apache.org>wrote: > >> 2013/6/8 Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> >> >> > >> > Good point, we forgot about that. It might be possible to use >>includeIn >> > to defer its instantiation or add some other attribute that works like >> > that but isn't tied to states. >> > >> > >> So from your response seems you're thinking in a state implementation >> similar to what we have today in flex 4, isn't it? >> >> Regarding deferred implementation maybe the proposal could be something >> like a value object that holds all config properties of the alert dialog >> (this will be the example posted by Peter) and the "show" method will be >> the one that unchains the process of create the UI Object through a >>static >> method. So all alerts VOs will be only a proxy that are very light >>weight >> and only it will pay as you go when calling "show" through delegating >>the >> work to the class that generates the fat UI object. >>
