Re: User docs entry for strands and beads

Hi Alex, very valuable info as always. +1 to make "getBeadByType" return latest bead added and to keep removeBead API as we have today. I found that problem and although I understand your point and reasons on what you explain, we must understand the reality that many few users will be such advan

Re: User docs entry for strands and beads

Hi, Specifically, the "delete removeBead" change would consist of: 1) making the strand's array public 2) removing removeBead from IStrand and UIBase and HTMLElementWrapper (and other places) 3) adding an org.apache.royale.utils.removeBead function. Because, you are correct that someone is goin

Re: Royale XML and QNames

The flag idea sounds promising. As far as XMLQName goes, I was thinking that it would subclass Name and the method signatures would still use Name. I don’t think it’s very common to actually create a QName, so that would likely work. Of course having the overhead of a subclass every time a QNam

Re: [royale-asjs] branch develop updated: improve IActivable to not rely on ids and use new activableName property

Hi Alex, El sáb., 29 dic. 2018 a las 8:22, Alex Harui () escribió: > Hi, > > In the code you posted, I agree you don't need to change the name of the > "name" parameter. I am more interested in every place I see "IActivable" > and isActive. I haven't looked at the code in detail, but it sounds

Re: Royale XML and QNames

If you have an app using XML with non-default XML namespaces, how do you write the code without using QName? If it is true that QName is rarely needed, then your plan becomes more reasonable. And we could flip the inheritance where QName extends XMLQName and the signatures in XML take XMLQName

Re: Royale XML and QNames

The only way I’ve ever seen XML (and QNames) constructed is with markup. The XML class constructs the QNames. (FWIW I implemented an optimization where it reuses QNames when possible because I was seeing that QNames were causing many MB of memory usage in XML heavy apps.) I guess it is possible

Jenkins build is back to normal : royale-asjs_jsonly #2142

See

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-asjs_MXTests #307

See Changes: [carlosrovira] Continue improving PopUp component: - define open and close events - [carlosrovira] fix docs [carlosrovira] fix popup chain to ensure other components

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-asjs_MXTests #308

See -- [...truncated 2.36 MB...] [mxmlc] using source file:

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-asjs_MXTests #309

See -- [...truncated 2.36 MB...] [mxmlc] using source file: