The FB2 syntax hilighter ignores it, but I can confirm that it exists and works in Flex 2. Makes you wonder why it wasn't in the docs...
Thanks for your help. This just cut my packet size by about 75% and simplified my client code significantly. I'm a very happy man. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "ben.clinkinbeard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Nah, looks like it was just undocumented in 2: > > http://nondocs.blogspot.com/2007/04/metadatatransient.html > http://www.darronschall.com/weblog/archives/000271.cfm > > HTH, > Ben > > > --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "simonjpalmer" <simonjpalmer@> > wrote: > > > > Wait... this is 3, I am on 2... > > > > I can't find a reference to this in Flex 2, is it a new feature of 3? > > > > --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "ben.clinkinbeard" > > <ben.clinkinbeard@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > http://livedocs.adobe.com/labs/flex/3/html/wwhelp/wwhimpl/common/html/wwhelp.htm?context=LiveDocs_Book_Parts&file=metadata_066_15.html > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "simonjpalmer" <simonjpalmer@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > I have a situation where I have a deliberate mismatch between my AS3 > > > > and Java objects. > > > > > > > > I have a Java object > > > > > > > > package com.java > > > > class X > > > > { > > > > private String name; > > > > public String getName(){return name;} > > > > public void setName(String name){this.name=name;} > > > > } > > > > > > > > and an ActionScript object > > > > > > > > package com.as3 > > > > { > > > > [Managed] > > > > [RemoteClass(alias="com.java.X")] > > > > public class X > > > > { > > > > private var name:String; > > > > private var age:Number; > > > > } > > > > } > > > > > > > > this all works great and my X.name gets transported back and forth > > > > reliably, however when data is transmitted from client to server > I get > > > > a warning message from the framework on the server which says... > > > > > > > > "Ignoring set property age for type com.as3.X as a setter could > not be > > > > found." > > > > > > > > This means that the age property was transmitted unnecessarily. > Not a > > > > problem for a primitive like a Number, but a real problem if age > > > > contained an array of objects. > > > > > > > > What I think I need is something like the "transient" keyword in > Java > > > > object persistence which causes a property not to be considered for > > > > persistence, or in this case transmission. > > > > > > > > Does any such thing exist, or is there another way of doing this? > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > >
