Pure Actionscript vs. MXML

Question

I understand that the answer to this question may be mostly
subjective to some, but I'm trying to zero in on the objective
part. In developing my apps, I am finding a regular tension between
having my Flex components developed in MXML vs. Actionscript. I
wanted to ask a general question, and again, trying to be objective
as possible, is it better to develop Flex components in MXML or in
pure Actionscript?
While MXML of course let's you perform WYSIWYG development in
Flex Builder's GUI editor, I have run into things that can't be
done very gracefully in MXML, reuse of MXML components can become
cumbersome, and there's a lack of control of loading and unloading
of components in MXML, which you can accomplish in Actionscript
much better.
I have noticed that what I have seen of the Flex API is pure
Actionscript, which would indicate a lean toward Actionscript, but
then I've seen code snippets for components in various places on
the web posted in MXML.
So to try to get down to the crux of the matter -- is it
inherently better to develop Flex components in pure Actionscript
or in MXML, and why?
Thanks -- I'm curious as to community responses....
B

Answer 1

Tankman,
I'll take one last stab here.
quote:
Wait, you've completely lost me- you're saying that MXML
isn't declarative because it can include Actionscript?
You said previously that "the Flex documentation explicitly
states that MXML is declarative, and therefore limited". I replied
with "MXML isn't completely declarative, it allows embedded
Actionscript." In other words, while MXML components are
declarative, they aren't 100% declarative. An MXML component is
both declarative and includes embedded Actionscript. The intent of
the original question was to compare writing components in MXML
(which includes embedded Actionscript), versus writing components
exclusively in Actionscript. Never at any time was there any
intention to be discussing writing components in MXML while
prohibiting any use of embedded Actionscript, like virtually all
tutorials and samples from Adobe do. The thrust is to determine if
going in either direction (MXML, which again includes embedded
Actionscript, vs. pure Actionscript) either provides or removes any
features / functionality that the other has access to.
quote:
By that logic, no, there are no limitations to MXML. Since it
has actionscript in it.
Now you've answered the question. In your opinion, writing a
component using MXML (once again, which includes embedded
Actionscript) has no limitations.
quote:
By your classification system, I could just make my entire
application one MXML file, with 9000 lines of actionscript in it,
doing all the work, and that would count as "MXML".
Yes, this is true. But the question wasn't an architectural
design one of how the app should be broken into subcomponents, the
question was about the merits of building your components in MXML
vs. pure Actionscript. Your scenario has nothing to do with using
MXML vs. pure Actionscript -- that is merely a design choice with
whichever one you choose. One could just as easily write 9000 lines
of Actionscript in a single monolithic Actionscript class.
Based on your answer above, about there being no limitations
of MXML when you include Actionscript, if that is true, then I
believe one has to conclude that writing MXML components is
superior to Actionscript, based on the fact that Actionscript
components cannot be rendered and modified in the designer. Now,
whether MXML has limitations was the question posed in this mail
thread, and that answer still remains to be seen. But if your
answer is true, then MXML is clearly superior, based on avaiable
tooling, to Actionscript.