IMHO, dynamic is quicksand for consumers of your framework. One mis-typed property name and you'll spend hours sloshing around trying to find it. I wrote a ton of AS code for the Flash MX 2004 components and the dynamic nature was a real pain in the ass. It was a huge step forward to go back to working with stricter languages.
________________________________ From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Josh McDonald Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 9:08 PM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Classes defined in MXML - are they dynamic? Can they be? Thanks for that. Yeah it's not something I'm planning on doing right now, I'm just sort of thinking out loud about a framework I really need to get off my ass and write in my spare time :) And I'm just growing ideas as to how I go about it. -J On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 1:59 PM, Alex Harui <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: They are not dynamic by default. I'm not sure if there is a way to make them dynamic. IMHO, it is not a recommended practice, and there is usually some other way. ________________________________ From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com <mailto:flexcoders@yahoogroups.com> [mailto:flexcoders@yahoogroups.com <mailto:flexcoders@yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of Josh McDonald Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 8:41 PM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com <mailto:flexcoders@yahoogroups.com> Subject: [flexcoders] Classes defined in MXML - are they dynamic? Can they be? Like I'm an unpopular Digger, "Title says it all". -J -- "Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls. It tolls for thee." :: Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald :: 0437 221 380 :: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[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] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
