Hi Alex, I think we should duplicate the example so we can have a Basic version and a Jewel version. We're publishing examples on social networks and good looking interface in crucial. So if we want both things we only can fork and have *RemoteObjectAMFTest* and *RemoteObjectAMFTestJewel* or *RemoteObjectAMFTest* and *RemoteObjectAMFTestBasic* Maybe the later is better since we published the other name as the one that uses the good looking interface
thanks El mar., 2 oct. 2018 a las 2:55, Alex Harui (<[email protected]>) escribió: > At some point the RemoteObjectAMFTest broke for SWF. This is rather > annoying as it was a good test bed for debugging the compiler output and > comparing the JS code to the SWF code. One thing that broke it was > upgrading the UI to use Jewel components because Jewel isn't working that > well in SWF. Our examples should work on both SWF and JS with a few > exceptions where the app was designed for JS only, like MDL examples. I'm > tempted to rip the Jewel components out of this example and go back to > Basic. > > -Alex > > -- Carlos Rovira http://about.me/carlosrovira
