Against Fx - ASDocs
Ben Clinkinbeard
2.ASDocs
Providing clear documentation by using namespaces or package names for
disambiguation would be difficult. We need to provide documentation
for both Halo and Gumbo classes (Halo is not going anywhere till Gumbo
has full functional parity with Halo). If we used packaging to
differentiate, you would have to look in different directories for
documentation depending on which control, Halo or Gumbo, you wanted to
reference. If we used namespaces for disambiguation, you would then
have Button/Button or CheckBox/CheckBox living in the same directory -
one entry providing documentation for the Halo Button, the other for
the Gumbo Button. We already have anecdotal complaints around the RPC
services which used packaging to differentiate RPC base classes from
RPC classes enhanced for MXML use, and don’t want to repeat those
mistakes again.
Tom Chiverton
> 2.ASDocs
> Providing clear documentation by using namespaces or package names for
> disambiguation would be difficult. We need to provide documentation
> for both Halo and Gumbo classes (Halo is not going anywhere till Gumbo
> has full functional parity with Halo).
LIveDocs already has to cope with AIR-only properties and classes, so
some sort of labeling should be easy enough, or list 'Button (3)' and
'Button (4)' separately.
Not doing something because it's 'difficult' doesn't cut it with me -
this is the company that built Flex in the first place, did AIR in
no-time at all etc.
> If we used packaging to
> differentiate, you would have to look in different directories for
> documentation depending on which control, Halo or Gumbo, you wanted to
> reference.
... and ? The bottom-left pane of the 3 doesn't have to be a straight
dump of all the classes does it - spot flex.3.Buton and flex.4.Button
and list them as above.
> If we used namespaces for disambiguation, you would then
> have Button/Button or CheckBox/CheckBox living in the same directory -
> one entry providing documentation for the Halo Button, the other for
> the Gumbo Button.
Right, so don't do that - put them in different packages. xmlns:mx and
xmlns (or xmlns:fx if you like) can be used to indicate which Button
an MXML tag referers to.
> We already have anecdotal complaints around the RPC
> services which used packaging to differentiate RPC base classes from
This trips you up, what ? Once ? Where as the current plan is to force
every Flex developer to *constantly* try and remember the difference
between Flex 3 and Flex 4 Button, and choose the correct one - this is
no different if it's Button and FxButton or Button and mx:Button.
--
Tom
Simeon Bateman
Different packages fix the problem for the most part, and yeah in the
AS docs they have a cute icon for air only properties. so maybe they
have a cute little Fx for the gumbonents.
To be honest I totally don't care about this issue. I think that
developers will figure it out.
sim