Bummer... I've got some classes in which I'm doing a lot of the stuff declaritvely in MXML, and I just didn't want the ids leaking into the public API.
I guess I'll just have to rethink things a little bit, make the declarative stuff the public API, and have it reference the functions that are declared in <mx:script> that used to be ;-) -J On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 11:30 AM, Bjorn Schultheiss < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Everything you described is possible except the protected instead of > public part. > At some point one of the accessor must be public. > > > --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com <flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>, "Josh > McDonald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hey guys, > > > > Is it possible to define (non visual) components in MXML that are > protected > > instead of public, but can still be referenced by the ID (or a name, or > > something)? > > > > Cheers, > > > > -J > > > > -- > > "Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls. It tolls for > thee." > > > > :: Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald > > :: 0437 221 380 :: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > -- "Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls. It tolls for thee." :: Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald :: 0437 221 380 :: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
