On 7/9/06, Jim Grandy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I don't quite understand this logic; it seems like having the AVM2 kernel use the class system
doesn't mean that the AVM3 kernel must use it...
Rewriting the lzloader stuff without the class system would be a an amount of work that I'm
not convinced it is worth doing unless there is a more immediate need.
I'm browsing through the Legals sources this afternoon, and had some
comments:
First, on the contents of WEB-INF/lps/lfc/kernel/swf.
+ The folder name 'swf' is imprecise, and will be confusing when we
add a Flash 9 kernel. May I suggest 'avm2' as the most precise
option? (AVM == Adobe Virtual Machine, AVM2 is the one used in
Flash6-8, AVM3 is used in Flash9. The only other option that covers
Flash7-8 is ActionScript 2, but we're targeting a runtime not a
language.) The same argument covers WEB-INF/lps/lfc/views/platform/
swf, and anywhere else we are switching on kernel.
+ LzXMLParser.as and LzXMLTranslator.as have the svn:executable
property set; it should be cleared in both cases.
+ I notice several files (LzMediaLoader, LzLoader, LzLibraryLoader,
LzLibrary) that use Class() and refer to LzNode. In the absence of
other code or documentation, I assume these are the proposed kernel
APIs for those features. I strongly feel that we should avoid
dependencies on the OpenLaszlo class system in the kernel APIs. Here
are my arguments:
++ OL class dependency in one kernel is going to require the same
dependency in all kernels, so we need a blanket policy one way or the
other;
I don't quite understand this logic; it seems like having the AVM2 kernel use the class system
doesn't mean that the AVM3 kernel must use it...
Rewriting the lzloader stuff without the class system would be a an amount of work that I'm
not convinced it is worth doing unless there is a more immediate need.
_______________________________________________ Laszlo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-dev
