<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	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:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is AS3 Ready For Prime-Time? (part 2)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.taterboy.com/blog/2008/07/is-as3-ready-for-prime-time-part-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.taterboy.com/blog/2008/07/is-as3-ready-for-prime-time-part-2/</link>
	<description>FLASH :: FLEX :: AIR :: ILLUSTRATION :: ANIMATION :: WEB DEVELOPMENT</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 06:31:05 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Lanny</title>
		<link>http://www.taterboy.com/blog/2008/07/is-as3-ready-for-prime-time-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-114</link>
		<dc:creator>Lanny</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 20:53:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taterboy.com/blog/?p=18#comment-114</guid>
		<description>Flex needs a container class due to all the extra functionality such as styles, constraints, etc that Flex needs to do its advanced layout management.

This is much easier than maintaining your own child list:
function getChildren():Array {
  var children:Array = [];
  for (var i:int=0; i&lt;numChildren; i++) {
    children.push(getChildAt(i);
  }
  return children;
}</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Flex needs a container class due to all the extra functionality such as styles, constraints, etc that Flex needs to do its advanced layout management.</p>
<p>This is much easier than maintaining your own child list:<br />
function getChildren():Array {<br />
  var children:Array = [];<br />
  for (var i:int=0; i&lt;numChildren; i++) {<br />
    children.push(getChildAt(i);<br />
  }<br />
  return children;<br />
}</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: taterboy</title>
		<link>http://www.taterboy.com/blog/2008/07/is-as3-ready-for-prime-time-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-113</link>
		<dc:creator>taterboy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 19:04:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taterboy.com/blog/?p=18#comment-113</guid>
		<description>That certainly is simple and sweat, thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That certainly is simple and sweat, thanks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ian Ford</title>
		<link>http://www.taterboy.com/blog/2008/07/is-as3-ready-for-prime-time-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-112</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian Ford</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 18:55:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taterboy.com/blog/?p=18#comment-112</guid>
		<description>Is this not an adequate solution for removing all the children of a MovieClip? It's not a native method, but it's still only 3 lines of code (and perhaps only 1 if you don't care for readability).

while (some_clip.numChildren &gt; 0) {
    some_clip.removeChildAt(0);
}</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is this not an adequate solution for removing all the children of a MovieClip? It&#8217;s not a native method, but it&#8217;s still only 3 lines of code (and perhaps only 1 if you don&#8217;t care for readability).</p>
<p>while (some_clip.numChildren &gt; 0) {<br />
    some_clip.removeChildAt(0);<br />
}</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
