<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/rss2full.xsl" type="text/xsl" media="screen"?><?xml-stylesheet href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css" type="text/css" media="screen"?><rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" version="2.0">
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Flex and Flash Developer - Jesse Warden dot Kizz-ohm</title>
	
	<link>http://jessewarden.com</link>
	<description>A blog on software development, technology, games &amp; movies.</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:18:19 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5</generator>
		<atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/comments-jessewarden" type="application/rss+xml" /><item>
		<title>Comment on Designer vs. Developer: Declaring Stage Instances by erikbianchi</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/comments-jessewarden/~3/321971849/designer-vs-developer-declaring-stage-instances.html</link>
		<dc:creator>erikbianchi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jun 2008 09:32:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jessewarden.com/?p=1280#comment-96454</guid>
		<description>dang im always late and last!

dude ive been saying this for years: Flash should take a cue from .NET...

Anything on the stage is added in code in the .as file. Anything removed from stage is removed from the .as file. Nothing should be magically compiled into the swf and NOT added to the .as file for all to see as well.

I HATE how the stage and class are separate and treated with different rules.

for me though im a purist trapped in a pragmatist body (or the other way around, i forget). So I ALWAYS declare my movieclips but i have a small team and can enforce standards.

However, if your dealing with designers that just need to get things done outside of your influence, you can't spend your time purifying their code. So I saw do what works best for you at the time.

also, and i haven't touched the project panel since it never really worked for me EVER. it be nice if settings like that where in a standardized project.xml file so flash, fdt, flex etc could read and handle it to avoid the toggles between different users, ides, prefs, evil monkeys, etc.

-erik</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>dang im always late and last!</p>
<p>dude ive been saying this for years: Flash should take a cue from .NET&#8230;</p>
<p>Anything on the stage is added in code in the .as file. Anything removed from stage is removed from the .as file. Nothing should be magically compiled into the swf and NOT added to the .as file for all to see as well.</p>
<p>I HATE how the stage and class are separate and treated with different rules.</p>
<p>for me though im a purist trapped in a pragmatist body (or the other way around, i forget). So I ALWAYS declare my movieclips but i have a small team and can enforce standards.</p>
<p>However, if your dealing with designers that just need to get things done outside of your influence, you can&#8217;t spend your time purifying their code. So I saw do what works best for you at the time.</p>
<p>also, and i haven&#8217;t touched the project panel since it never really worked for me EVER. it be nice if settings like that where in a standardized project.xml file so flash, fdt, flex etc could read and handle it to avoid the toggles between different users, ides, prefs, evil monkeys, etc.</p>
<p>-erik</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/comments-jessewarden/~4/321971849" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://jessewarden.com/2008/06/designer-vs-developer-declaring-stage-instances.html#comment-96454</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Exception Handling in ActionScript 3 for AdBlock Plus by Yotam Laufer</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/comments-jessewarden/~3/324231466/exception-handling-in-actionscript-3-for-adblock-plus.html</link>
		<dc:creator>Yotam Laufer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jun 2008 08:47:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jessewarden.com/2007/12/exception-handling-in-actionscript-3-for-adblock-plus.html#comment-96447</guid>
		<description>You can get around the VerifyError by loading swfs with URLLoader and the doing a Loader.loadBytes, you can catch the exception there. BUT! Since this will load code directly into your apps' SecurityDomain you should only use it to load from trusted sources.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You can get around the VerifyError by loading swfs with URLLoader and the doing a Loader.loadBytes, you can catch the exception there. BUT! Since this will load code directly into your apps&#8217; SecurityDomain you should only use it to load from trusted sources.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/comments-jessewarden/~4/324231466" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://jessewarden.com/2007/12/exception-handling-in-actionscript-3-for-adblock-plus.html#comment-96447</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Designer vs. Developer: Declaring Stage Instances by Steven Sacks</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/comments-jessewarden/~3/317637483/designer-vs-developer-declaring-stage-instances.html</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven Sacks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Jun 2008 20:07:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jessewarden.com/?p=1280#comment-95199</guid>
		<description>The problem here is that instead of joining designers and developers, Adobe increases the divide.

What they should have done (and still should do) is make it so you can declare stuff in the class, and if you check the box in Flash to do it for you, it doesn't complain about it, and instead says "Obviously we have a designer and developer working together here."

I don't see how it would be so hard to have an option to auto-declare turned on and also allow you to declare what you need.  I'm so tired of seeing Adobe post lame ideas like "How do we make the Actions window better?"  How about making the Flash IDE Compiler better first?  :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The problem here is that instead of joining designers and developers, Adobe increases the divide.</p>
<p>What they should have done (and still should do) is make it so you can declare stuff in the class, and if you check the box in Flash to do it for you, it doesn&#8217;t complain about it, and instead says &#8220;Obviously we have a designer and developer working together here.&#8221;</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t see how it would be so hard to have an option to auto-declare turned on and also allow you to declare what you need.  I&#8217;m so tired of seeing Adobe post lame ideas like &#8220;How do we make the Actions window better?&#8221;  How about making the Flash IDE Compiler better first?  <img src='http://jessewarden.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/comments-jessewarden/~4/317637483" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://jessewarden.com/2008/06/designer-vs-developer-declaring-stage-instances.html#comment-95199</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Designer vs. Developer: Declaring Stage Instances by Steve Polk</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/comments-jessewarden/~3/317065048/designer-vs-developer-declaring-stage-instances.html</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Polk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Jun 2008 19:28:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jessewarden.com/?p=1280#comment-94892</guid>
		<description>Vladimir, I think your approach is very similar to how I have done in the past.  Never undervalue strongly-typed vars.  Good article Jesse, I am glad to see someone getting a consensus so we can all start implementing some standards.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Vladimir, I think your approach is very similar to how I have done in the past.  Never undervalue strongly-typed vars.  Good article Jesse, I am glad to see someone getting a consensus so we can all start implementing some standards.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/comments-jessewarden/~4/317065048" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://jessewarden.com/2008/06/designer-vs-developer-declaring-stage-instances.html#comment-94892</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Designer vs. Developer: Declaring Stage Instances by Matthew Keefe</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/comments-jessewarden/~3/316999166/designer-vs-developer-declaring-stage-instances.html</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Keefe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Jun 2008 17:50:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jessewarden.com/?p=1280#comment-94863</guid>
		<description>@mh, That is an interesting idea, but sometimes time doesn't allow it. Vladimir, that is a very good idea.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@mh, That is an interesting idea, but sometimes time doesn&#8217;t allow it. Vladimir, that is a very good idea.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/comments-jessewarden/~4/316999166" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://jessewarden.com/2008/06/designer-vs-developer-declaring-stage-instances.html#comment-94863</feedburner:origLink></item>
</channel>
</rss>
