Hi Ian,
Not trying to say MXML isn't good, or that it isn't the best choice;
like I hope I stated clearly earlier, I agree with all the arguments for
why Flex is the better choice for the reasons given.
What I was trying to do, is to clarify that I felt your comparison of
code isn't really true in a real-world situation because one is likely
to use a lot more abstractions and a lot less manual UI programming in
AS3 than you were implying. This simplification might mislead someone
into thinking you can't also achieve the same UI abstraction in AS3 as
you can in MXML. But the truth is, you can -- just not out of the box.
Then - surely - for every project you need to stitch together your
components. Because in no two projects are the same components
arranged in the same way.
Well, 99% of all the UI that is ever made can be viewed as a 'component'
-if thats what you want to call it.
Yes and no, it's not all that many when you think about it, and 99% of
all interfaces are the same. There is a 'button' it has different roll
over states, there is some associated animation. Sometimes you have
arrays of similar buttons etc... the permutations are not all that
complex or extensive...
For organic interfaces that don't follow a standard you will need to
write custom code, but surely this is the same in Flex. I've had great
success writing AS3 core classes [aka components].
What I (and others) have been saying is that MXML is a pretty good
solution for that phase - the layout.
Agreed.
I'm not saying MXML is the be-all and end-all. It absolutely isn't. I
really like - and use - AS3. But MXML is _useful_ as part of the
view/layout definition; it's an easy, readable, concise shorthand for
connecting things together. There's no reason you can't use AS3. But
that's no reason to argue _against_ MXML, particularly.
Sure, and as I stated at the end of my last post; especially when you
don't already have a lot of AS3 classes hanging around in your com
folder. Which I do, so Flex is less useful for my solo flash projects.
What you seem to be saying is 'but I can achieve the same in AS3 with
a bit of work first'. Fine. What you haven't said is 'and I think
using MXML is a bad idea because...'
That's true, because I don't think MXML is bad!
:D
[I'm not black and white]
I'm not even really sure why this is an argument, and exactly what you
are arguing.
Just trying to clarify that we AS3 programmers don't code UI from
scratch either! We also use UI classes just like you do in MXML; only
ours are not 'out-of-the-box'.
But I'm describing Flex/AS3/MXML straight out of the box. Why write a
bunch of code up front that you don't actually need to? Why fix what
isn't broken?
Well skinning is a b*tch, and custom classes give me more flexibility -
granted it's not always worth the effort. But somehow it is for me.
If you love writing your own libraries - great, go
ahead. If you feel the Flex components don't suit your needs - again,
go ahead. My argument was AS3 is more verbose and less readable for
layout than MXML. That's true however you spin it.
Flex is great for applications; and especially for team-based
application development. I'm using Flex to work on application
development with others, and it's good -- faster is some regards,
convoluted in others. Granted I am still a little sappling in Flex
compared to Flash.
Like I already stated, I think Flex is great and ultimately; better for
UI because not all coders have, or would want to, code their own UI classes.
At the root of it, MXML is just AS3. It just goes through a
translation stage first. I'm not clear why it seems to offend you so
much.
It doesn't! that was another person...
:P
What I was answering was Elia's post stating that 'it's crap'. I find
that a poor value-judgement. As I've said in other mails - we use it.
It's a useful tool. There are others. If you choose not to use it,
then that's fine.
Yeah, I don't think it's "crap". It has a really great value, and like
AS3; you can code it like crap, or you can code it well.
I'm pretty sure the original original question was asking about the
situations in which you'd use Flash over Flex, and vice versa, and
what might be the technical reasons for doing so. I think we've
drifted. MXML isn't Flex. AS3 isn't Flash.
Oh we've totally drifted! But that it was interesting to read all the
emotions...
;)
Always love your contributions Ian,
All the best,
Sebastian.
(I think I've had enough of this, now - I just seem to be repeating myself...)
Yeah, me too!
;)
_______________________________________________
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
