[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnash-dev] Re: About AMF (Techical)

From: Rob Savoye
Subject: Re: [Gnash-dev] Re: About AMF (Techical)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 14:06:59 -0600
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20080723)

strk wrote:

By self-contained I mean SWF files that can be run with a flash player
and unambiguosly tell whether the SWF file is working as expected or not.

Right, but I also really like unit level tests. Running all test code in a full flash interpreter can create problems that aren't really there. The best testing includes both unit tests (like libamf.all or libnet.all), and integration tests, like running a swf test case through the interpreter. (like and

There's none indeed, we'll need to add one, but if we work on self-contained ones, automatically whatever is used will be tested,
be it element-based or buffer-based. It'd be a detail.

My point is test cases are important, more so than things like comments in the code.

I'm not saying Element-based stuff is broken, just not necessarely
convenient to use (and most likely unable to deal with circular refs).

Please don't be so hung up on circular references. I have some ideas on handling them, but I plan to wait till I see REFERENCE AMF types used in the wild. Breaking is not the same when it comes to picking ones priorities...

That'd be a great step forward.

Well, if we can stop bitching about AMF and RTMP, I could get done what I need to so I can get back to Cygnal.

        - rob -

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]