Re: [flexcoders] Smallest filesize of a swf in Flex 3 is larger then Flex 2?

2009-03-17 Thread Nick Collins
A big part of that reason is that when you attach any library, be it
the SDK or an external SWC, as a RSL, it is going to increase the size
of a singular app. The reason is that when a library is specified as
an RSL, the ENTIRE library gets loaded, not just the parts that are
needed, since it doesn't know what classes will be needed.
Additionally, RSLs are all loaded at Frame 1, and are mandatory
(meaning all RSLs are required to be loaded), increasing the load time
if they haven't been downloaded previously.

Where you see the major gains with RSLs is when you are using them
across multiple applications, because rather than re-download the RSL,
it will pull the RSL from the browser cache, speeding the load time,
although it is still loading more classes than otherwise. For this
reason RSLs are usually a bad idea for a single application, because
it will actually have a smaller size all compiled into a single SWF,
and loading bits of the application via modules, which are only loaded
as needed.

Nick

On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 8:55 PM, Dan yldle...@hotmail.com wrote:
 Hi Flexcoders,

 It is always claimed that by caching framework.swz of Flex 3, the swf size
 is always the smaller. However. from the generated linked-report. in Flex 3,
 some classes like RSLloader and some ResourceBundle classes are being added,
 which actually increase the swf size.

 Since my application is making up of first loading a shared library, and
 then upon runtime, it loaded other very small modules. These modules are
 making up of very small file size (a few k byte), the overhead added by
 these Flex3 loaders and bundles has largly increase the TOTAL application
 size by a huge amount (cause there are hundreds of this kind of small
 modules when summing up the little increase of this overhead, it becomes M
 byte). The start up time is down a bit (loading the smaller library and
 smaller init app), but the overall brandwidth consumpt much more now.

 So is there any way to trim off those overhead? Or I need to compile those
 smaller modules by a Flex 2 compiler?

 Anyone have any idea?

 Dan

 


[flexcoders] Smallest filesize of a swf in Flex 3 is larger then Flex 2?

2009-03-16 Thread Dan
Hi Flexcoders,

It is always claimed that by caching framework.swz of Flex 3, the swf size is 
always the smaller. However. from the generated linked-report. in Flex 3, some 
classes like RSLloader and some ResourceBundle classes are being added, which 
actually increase the swf size. 

Since my application is making up of first loading a shared library, and then 
upon runtime, it loaded other very small modules. These modules are making up 
of very small file size (a few k byte), the overhead added by these Flex3 
loaders and bundles has largly increase the TOTAL application size by a huge 
amount (cause there are hundreds of this kind of small modules when summing up 
the little increase of this overhead, it becomes M byte). The start up time is 
down a bit (loading the smaller library and smaller init app), but the overall 
brandwidth consumpt much more now. 

So is there any way to trim off those overhead? Or I need to compile those 
smaller modules by a Flex 2 compiler?

Anyone have any idea?

Dan