I still stand by my original rant saying just use a component :)
<mx:Application>
<funk:FunkAppTemplate>
<!-- App controls -->
</funk:FunkAppTemplate>
</mx:Application>
I'm a big fan of using composition over inheritance when possible. Don't
treat <mx:Application> as your application, think of it as your bootloader,
the host for your application. IMHO Your template should inherit from
Container, not Application :)
-Josh
On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 6:51 AM, Alex Harui <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We're discussing whether you can have an app template. Suppose you
> wanted every app you build to have a menubar at the top and controlbar at
> the bottom. If you just do
>
> AmyAppTemplate.mxml
> <mx:Application>
> <mx:MenuBar/>
> <mx:ControlBar />
> </mx:Application>
>
> You can't just use that in your next app like this:
>
> <amy:AmyAppTemplate xmlns:amy="*" ... />
> <mx:Button/>
> <mx:TextInput />
> ...
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On
> Behalf Of *Amy
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 06, 2008 6:22 AM
> *To:* flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
> *Subject:* [flexcoders] Re: Can we subclass Application yet?
>
> --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com <flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>, "Josh
> McDonald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Interesting. So either the documentation is very old, or
> [DefaultProperty]
> > simply isn't inherited? Either way the docs could use updating. I'll
> put
> > testing this onto my todo list :)
>
> As you know, I'm not nearly the whiz kid you guys are, but is this
> discussion talking about working around a problem with
> childDescriptors? I don't really have anything to add to the
> conversation, just trying to understand what is being said :-).
>
> Thanks;
>
> Amy
>
>
>
--
"Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls. It tolls for thee."
:: Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald
:: 0437 221 380 :: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
