Rags to Riches

en route to a “richer” Internet

1. Ben 07.06.07 / 6pm

   Not sure about other IDEs but FlexBuilder doesn’t require you to type it anyways. Its essentially ignored in the auto-complete list, so typing “
2. Ben 07.06.07 / 6pm

   Ugh, tags got killed… typing “<Bu” will bring up <mx:Button in the list.
3. Mrinal Wadhwa 07.06.07 / 7pm

   Ben,

   Thats strange…. for me once I’ve finished writing my Application tag as described above … <Bu brings up <Button>in the auto complete … which is how it should be cause when you have a different name space for components … Flex Builder’s auto-complete shows the correct name space.

   As for your first comment … I have two things to say ..
   1. I think this makes the code a lot cleaner
   2. There are many who do not use Flex Builder and for them this saves a lot of typing.
4. Anand Vardhan 07.06.07 / 7pm

   Nice tip for beginners.
5. Mrinal Wadhwa 07.06.07 / 7pm

   Are others seeing what Ben is seeing? … for me the autocomplete behaves properly.

   @Anand: Thanks, thats the idea … I will be doing more such beginner-intermediate level tips over the coming days.
6. Britt 07.06.07 / 9pm

   Mrinal - Ben is saying that with xmlns:mx=” … Even if you still start typing But… rather than mx:But… FlexBuilder will autocomplete mx:Button - you don’t have to type mx: at all, you can just start typing the class name.
7. Mrinal Wadhwa 07.06.07 / 11pm

   Britt,
   Thank you for trying to clarify … but Ben said .. “Ugh, tags got killed…” I feel he meant that after he uses xmlns=”… auto complete still suggests code with mx: for him and he does not like that

   For me, that is not the case and autocomplete works as you would expect it to .. code is suggested without the mx:

   Ben,
   Some clarification would help.
8. Britt 07.06.07 / 11pm

   “Not sure about other IDEs but FlexBuilder doesn’t require you to type it anyways”

   He’s referring to “mx” ( mx free mxml ).

   In FlexBuilder, you don’t have to type “” tag… all you need to do is type “
9. Britt 07.06.07 / 11pm

   When he said “tags got killed” he meant that your blog ate up the greater than signs just like what happened on my post above.

   anyways - you dont have to type “mx:Bu…” - to autocomplete the Button tag, all you need to do is start typing “Bu…” and flex builder will autocomplete the Button tag for you.
10. Mrinal Wadhwa 07.06.07 / 11pm

    Aha .. got ya .. damn Wordpress !

    Anyways .. thanks for the clarification .. so we’re good here … Its established that the code hinting works fine … and this approach can be useful although everyone would have their preference.

    My preference is mx free mxml .. because:
    1. Its cleaner code
    2. It means less typing, at least for people without FlexBuilder.
11. Faser 07.07.07 / 12am

    It could be a good approach. Every XML based languages I know (XHTML, Mozilla XUL, Microsoft XAML) don’t use a prefix for the default namespace. I don’t understand why Adobe use the not necessary mx: prefix in all examples and documentation.
12. Eric Geddes 07.07.07 / 2am

    The explicit inclusion of the default namespace prefix both provides an immediately apparent visual cue and lends semantic context to an XML node.

    Arguably, the first thing a new user learns when encountering MXML for the first time is that “these blocky things that make the flashy parts all have the same prefix”.

    From that point on they know, when looking at examples online or in the documentation, that when they see “mx:”, it precedes a “blocky thing”, or class, that comes from Adobe/Macromedia, rather than from the author of the example they are attempting to understand.

    After some experience writing and using their own classes, and those of others (the far majority of whom employ the “mx:” prefix, serving to reinforce the notion), they arrive at a point that they can comprehend understand that the prefix is superfluous and optional.

    That said, I can say with (relative) confidence that including a namespace for every MXML node is what many would consider to be a ‘best practice’ for Flex development. Not so for general purpose XML… but this isn’t general purpose XML…

    I would argue it’s just one of those pain-in-the-ass things that may make it infinitely easier to maintain or extend a project in the future… right up there with the use of concise, human-readable, and semantically appropriate variable names, placing spaces between operators and the values adjacent to them, and applying just enough comments to communicate whatever intention the well-written-for-clarity-as-well-as-performance code requires, and doing so during development rather than afterwards.

    I don’t know what is the ‘right answer’, or even if there is one, but I do know that simply because you CAN do something (and are even perfectly justified in doing so), doesn’t mean you SHOULD do something.

    Nice to have the choice, though. Thank you.
13. Mrinal Wadhwa 07.07.07 / 2am

    Hi Eric,

    All the points you make are very true and I agree with you on
    all counts, you said:

    “After some experience writing and using their own classes, and those of others ….. they arrive at a point that they can comprehend understand that the prefix is superfluous and optional.”

    Well with this tip, I was just helping them arrive at that point.
14. Eric Geddes 07.07.07 / 4am

    Indeed. Good show.
15. Vijay Khambalkar 07.09.07 / 10am

    Good trick, thanks for this nice tip.
16. joeflash 07.09.07 / 10pm

    Normally I would agree this is a time-saving tip. For writing pseudo code on whiteboards, it could definitely make things easier. But, as others have said, getting into the practice of not using the mx namespace will look funny as soon as you start using custom namespaces.

    Given that typing the mx namespace takes no time at all when using the auto-completion in Flex (Ctrl-SPACE), which is quite powerful compared to Flash or DW, I would agree with the above that, as a best practice, the mx namespace should be included at all times.

    Although from a capabilities standpoint it’s good to know that Flex is ‘flex’-ible enough to assume the mx namespace has been included if the developer prefers not to use it.
17. maploop » Blog Archive » Ego and the Art of Programming ActionScript: Default Namespace Tricks. 09.14.07 / 10am

    [...] So I was just minding my own business, getting in what little procrastination I could fit into my busy day, and happened upon the blog of one Mrinal Wadhwa discussing his tip that permits MXML without the mx:. Now I know what you’re thinking, and no, Mrinal is not, as far as I know, the kind Namibian man who continues to leave requests in the comments for me to help him transfer millions of dollars of his family’s money out of the country. [...]