Ultrashock Forums - View Single Post

worthyashes · 2009-01-30 #12

OK - well I have to disagree with Nutrox completely. Nutrox is telling you that basically MXML is unnecessary and a waste of time - if only you'd taken the time to learn how to do Actionscript properly you'd never have to rely on someone else to do the work. In fact, all MXML and Flex enables you to do is to skin components easily.

Balls.

You are completely missing the whole 'king point of Flex. And also the whole point of application development. You use the best tool for the job. If you are writting a game, then opening up flex builder and selecting 'New Flex Project' is an error, because Flex wasn't created do that. Flex has been created for data driven applications where the most important thing has been 'How are we going to display this data.' In this case it is fantastic that I can quickly put together a complex data display using charts, data grids and text areas safe in the knowledge that further down the line I can style them - but most importantly that I don't have to build them from scratch. And even better in MXML I can very very quickly lay them out safe in the knowledge that all the bits are going to be where I expect them to be. Yes - I could just have a main AS class and do lots of 'new VBox(), x = , y= , addChild' or I could just write the tags and there they are.

But even more than that - if I decide to not be an AS purist I can use a combination of MXML and AS to bind the components to the data without having to write loads of AS. Then when the variable changes the display changes. I've got MVC without having to **** about writing loads of code. Also I've the advantage of quickly and easily using states, transitions and effects all merely through tags. A great example is that if you change state and remove a child element the flex framework deals with it's complete removal. I don't need to clear listeners or loitering objects - they are sorted.

I've also got a completely skinnable set of components that I can also extend - using MXML or AS - to do whatever I want.

I'm no Flex evangelist or a particular lover of Flash. I believe in the right tool for the right place and the argument Nutrox is putting up if small minded to say the least. If you go down that line then why not put down Flash right now, go learn AJAX and JQuery and do everything that way? It's all possible if you put the work in.

Why not think about what you need to do and then select the correct tool to do it. If I wanted to build a house I'd probably use bricks, mortar,cement, bathroom tiles, etc - Flex gives me this foundation. I can pick the styles, colours and locations.

If I wanted to paint a work of art I'd start with a blank canvas and then get started - that's the joy of working with pure ActionScript.

	worthyashes	2009-01-30 #12
	OK - well I have to disagree with Nutrox completely. Nutrox is telling you that basically MXML is unnecessary and a waste of time - if only you'd taken the time to learn how to do Actionscript properly you'd never have to rely on someone else to do the work. In fact, all MXML and Flex enables you to do is to skin components easily. Balls. You are completely missing the whole 'king point of Flex. And also the whole point of application development. You use the best tool for the job. If you are writting a game, then opening up flex builder and selecting 'New Flex Project' is an error, because Flex wasn't created do that. Flex has been created for data driven applications where the most important thing has been 'How are we going to display this data.' In this case it is fantastic that I can quickly put together a complex data display using charts, data grids and text areas safe in the knowledge that further down the line I can style them - but most importantly that I don't have to build them from scratch. And even better in MXML I can very very quickly lay them out safe in the knowledge that all the bits are going to be where I expect them to be. Yes - I could just have a main AS class and do lots of 'new VBox(), x = , y= , addChild' or I could just write the tags and there they are. But even more than that - if I decide to not be an AS purist I can use a combination of MXML and AS to bind the components to the data without having to write loads of AS. Then when the variable changes the display changes. I've got MVC without having to **** about writing loads of code. Also I've the advantage of quickly and easily using states, transitions and effects all merely through tags. A great example is that if you change state and remove a child element the flex framework deals with it's complete removal. I don't need to clear listeners or loitering objects - they are sorted. I've also got a completely skinnable set of components that I can also extend - using MXML or AS - to do whatever I want. I'm no Flex evangelist or a particular lover of Flash. I believe in the right tool for the right place and the argument Nutrox is putting up if small minded to say the least. If you go down that line then why not put down Flash right now, go learn AJAX and JQuery and do everything that way? It's all possible if you put the work in. Why not think about what you need to do and then select the correct tool to do it. If I wanted to build a house I'd probably use bricks, mortar,cement, bathroom tiles, etc - Flex gives me this foundation. I can pick the styles, colours and locations. If I wanted to paint a work of art I'd start with a blank canvas and then get started - that's the joy of working with pure ActionScript.