That's interesting. So essentially, you could replace all the JS in the
ReactJS examples with AS?
I still think there are more productivity gains beyond that for ReactJS.
Anytime I look at these framework APIs using a lot of {} objects, that is
ripe for a more strongly-typed API surface.
-Alex
On 6/3/16, 2:06 PM, "Josh Tynjala" <joshtynj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>I had an idea recently that I haven't looked into too deeply, so it might
>turn out that it isn't feasible. However, I'd like to try adding an
>optional flag to make the compiler interpret XML literals in ActionScript
>as JSX instead (obviously, you'd no longer be able to use XML literals for
>their original purpose when you specify this flag). The compiler could
>generate the appropriate JavaScript calls to React.
>
>I think there is some JSX syntax that won't be treated as valid XML, but
>it
>might still be useful to have a subset.
>
>- Josh
>
>On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Peter Ent <p...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> FlexJS has a couple of non-Flash component libraries now, CreateJS and
>> jQuery, along with integration with Apache Cordova. This got me thinking
>> about ReactJS. I did a little investigation to see how it might fit with
>> FlexJS and I wrote a brief page about[1]. My opinion is that ReactJS,
>> especially when used with JSX, is more parallel to FlexJS and not easily
>> integrated as a project like some of the other JavaScript offerings.
>>
>> If you have familiarity with ReactJS, perhaps you could give the
>>article a
>> look and provide some feedback. Maybe I missed something crucial about
>> ReactJS.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Peter Ent
>> Adobe Systems/Apache Flex Project
>>
>>
>> [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLEX/FlexJS+and+ReactJS
>>
