If you included GWT, include Vaadin too (it's better but used more in Europe than in US). I used it a few yrs ago and liked it a lot.
But maybe this time my vote would be for Dart (AFTER FlexJS of course). On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 4:50 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > Good questions. My thoughts: > > > On 9/11/14 1:03 PM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >Some additional thoughts: (don¹t know if you can fit this in ‹ and I > >don¹t have the answers to all these points) > > > >FlexJS vs. Dart vs. Haxe. It seems that all three of these have points > >for strong typing. > I definitely try to make sure it doesn't sound like we thought of the idea > of using a higher-level language for generating JS. I include GWT and TS > in the list. I try not to set it up as a competition, but rather, a > validation that strong-typing is important in building big things. We can > all go down to the local lumber yard and hack together a dog house out of > wood and nails, but folks who build skyscrapers use different tools and > techniques. No high-rise buildings are made of wood and nails. > > > > >Is there an advantage of ActionScript over those? (not sure) > For dog houses, and probably one and two-story houses, there isn't any > advantage. But eventually, as your application grows, and the team that > is building it grows, the requirement most of these other languages have > of needing all of the code in once place in order to type-check it becomes > a practical limitation. Yes, these languages let you promise that some > external thing will have a particular contract, but the ActionScript VM > will verify the contract at the point of integration. The Dart VM might, > I haven't checked, but the JS runtimes certainly won't. > > >Is there an advantage of MXML? (probably yes) > I think HTML proved the advantages of declarative markup. > > > > >Maybe some thoughts on the MXML approach vs. HTML/CSS approach? > >advantages and challenges, etc. > I could certainly see someone creating a way to generate HTML from MXML, > so I don't see it as an either/or. We are just starting with MXML because > we have it, and it is extensible. I'm still not clear what is happening > with Web Components and HTML extensibility. But for sure, we have a > better chance of working in IE9. > > > > >What about TypeScript? Do we have advantages over that? What? > IMO, having a markup language gives us advantages over TS. > > While it would be awesome if FlexJS became the most popular way to write > HTML/JS/CSS apps, I will be more than happy just to be popular among > enterprise or some other smaller market of folks building really big apps. > The notion of having markup to basically have a diagram or schematic of > your components, and better connectors in AS and the VM to ensure those > components are connected properly, an IDE that understands all of that, a > debugger that also understands that, and scalability up to really large > applications whose source code cannot be gathered all in one place, and > scaleability down to mobile apps so you can share business logic with the > mobile companion apps should make us attractive to those who are thinking > ahead. Once the requirement comes out to put a fifth floor on your wooden > house, or add an addition to your house built in another country, you will > find yourself worrying about a lot more things if you aren't using FlexJS. > > -Alex > > -- Thank you, Oleg.
