RE: AMF for .NET Standard now available (.NET Core + olders runtimes)

[Paul Stearns <pa...@compuace.com.INVALID>]

Not to sound too ignorant, but would this be a replacement for FluorineFx?

----------------------------------------
From: Jason Taylor <jt...@dedoose.com>
Sent: 9/27/18 6:28 PM
To: users@flex.apache.org <us...@flex.apache.org>
Subject: RE: AMF for .NET Standard now available (.NET Core + olders runtimes)
Thanks so much huge, meant to get around to this awhile ago but never did.
Will definitely be checking it out.

-----Original Message-----
From: hugo
Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2018 6:23 AM
To: users@flex.apache.org
Subject: AMF for .NET Standard now available (.NET Core + olders runtimes)

Hi all,

News in town for .NET + Flex developers!

New AMF library for .NET developers using the .NET Standard 2.0, ie. 100%
compatible with .NET Framework, Mono and for the first time .NET Core!

The library is here: https://github.com/SolidSoft-Lda/AMFCore

--
Sent from: http://apache-flex-users.2333346.n4.nabble.com/

Re: AMF for .NET Standard now available (.NET Core + olders runtimes)

[hugo <hf...@gmail.com>]

Yes, it supports.
Also FluorineFx supports.



--
Sent from: http://apache-flex-users.2333346.n4.nabble.com/

Re: AMF for .NET Standard now available (.NET Core + olders runtimes)

[Deepak MS <me...@gmail.com>]

Will this library support https? I can recall that flourineFX was not
supporting https calls. It used to work only over http.

On Sun 30 Sep, 2018 5:41 pm hugo, <hf...@gmail.com> wrote:

> FluorineFx supports .NET since version 1.1 + RTMP + DataSets + other
> features
> and have a deep dependency on Windows Api calls and IIS.
> AMFCore don't support all this features and will never be, and runs
> independent on the OS and web server thru .NET Standard.
>
> For AMF3 and DTO/VO objects and runtimes that implements .NET Standard
> 2.0+,
> yes, it's a new alternative option.
>
> If you need features that AMFCore don't support or you can't care about
> .NET
> Core/OS portability than perhaps FluorineFx can be a better option
> (specially if you need that specific features).
>
> The goal of this library is to migrate a project to .NET Core with the
> mininum effort, so this library supports both .NET Framework and .NET Core
> thru .NET Standard during the process.
>
> If you need aditional features, can you can implement for you self.
> You can contribute that new features if the performance is not affected
> because I don't care about a library that does everything, I will need only
> 10% and have to pay a price (performance).
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://apache-flex-users.2333346.n4.nabble.com/
>

RE: AMF for .NET Standard now available (.NET Core + olders runtimes)

[hugo <hf...@gmail.com>]

FluorineFx supports .NET since version 1.1 + RTMP + DataSets + other features
and have a deep dependency on Windows Api calls and IIS.
AMFCore don't support all this features and will never be, and runs
independent on the OS and web server thru .NET Standard.

For AMF3 and DTO/VO objects and runtimes that implements .NET Standard 2.0+,
yes, it's a new alternative option.

If you need features that AMFCore don't support or you can't care about .NET
Core/OS portability than perhaps FluorineFx can be a better option
(specially if you need that specific features).

The goal of this library is to migrate a project to .NET Core with the
mininum effort, so this library supports both .NET Framework and .NET Core
thru .NET Standard during the process.

If you need aditional features, can you can implement for you self.
You can contribute that new features if the performance is not affected
because I don't care about a library that does everything, I will need only
10% and have to pay a price (performance).



--
Sent from: http://apache-flex-users.2333346.n4.nabble.com/