I'm not seeing anything like that in the HTML wrapper. Safari is definitely
throwing on exception on "new Event". Any idea what I'm doing wrong?
On 3/30/13 7:54 AM, "Erik de Bruin" <e...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote:
> I left out FlexGlobals on purpose, I plan to bring the Google Closure
> way of dealing with events to FlexJS. The GC way is not dependent on
> DOM based events and fits very snugly with the way Flex handles
> events.
>
> In the mean time I've a method in the "main" HTML that is called Event
> and that passes the event through to FlexGlobals for now.
>
> EdB
>
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> Hi Erik,
>>
>> I finally got time to try to switch over to FalconJX. It produces js files
>> and the app shows up, but the console shows an exception and the
>> interactivity of the application is mostly broken because the generated js
>> code has snippets like this:
>>
>> models.MyModel.prototype.set_labelText = function(value) {
>> var self = this;
>> if (value != self._labelText) {
>> self._labelText = value;
>> self.dispatchEvent(new Event("labelTextChanged"));
>> }
>> };
>>
>> In the FalconJS output, we are calling FlexGlobals.newObject because Event
>> is a special class in the browser that can't be instantiated via "new" and
>> FlexJS is using these DOM Events.
>>
>> Did I miss a flag, or can I go about trying to intercept these calls and
>> have them call FlexGlobals.newObject instead?
>>
>> -Alex
>>
>>
>> On 3/29/13 11:58 AM, "Erik de Bruin" <e...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, we're back in business! I think this time I have been working with
>>> the right version of FlexJS (the one with the timer and the drop down
>>> list?) and it looks to work as advertised:
>>>
>>> http://people.apache.org/~erikdebruin/flexjs/
>>>
>>> Time to get packing for the long flight ;-)
>>>
>>> EdB
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Erik de Bruin <e...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote:
>>>> Ah, and there's plenty left for you to "learn" from :-)
>>>>
>>>> EdB
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 2:30 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>> No worries. Might be a good way for me to learn how it works by getting
>>>>> it
>>>>> to work.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/29/13 12:31 AM, "Erik de Bruin" <e...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Uh oh... Turns out I was testing against an outdated ASJS lib
>>>>>> (pre-fb614905ac), so FalconJx DOESN'T WORK against the current
>>>>>> iteration of FlexJS. Sorry about that. I will work on that today, but
>>>>>> I don't have a lot of time, so it might be a while before I can catch
>>>>>> up, due to next week's travel to the land of golden opportunity.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> EdB
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 5:24 PM, Erik de Bruin <e...@ixsoftware.nl>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> And another update (things are going much better than I expected):
>>>>>>> FalconJx can now emit a fully functional version of the
>>>>>>> FlexJSTest_again demo application. You can see it in action here
>>>>>>> (provided you use Chrome or Firefox, I just noticed):
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~erikdebruin/flexjs/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Onwards and upwards ;-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> EdB
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 9:58 PM, Erik de Bruin <e...@ixsoftware.nl>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I'd have to look into it for specifics, but of the top of my head it
>>>>>>>> seems that this most depends on the implementation in the FlexJS JS
>>>>>>>> framework. Emitting the strings required by that framework should
>>>>>>>> really be easy enough. If needed we can "look forward" into AST to
>>>>>>>> look for binding information. I do this in several other places
>>>>>>>> already. Even the binding expressions shouldn't be too much of a
>>>>>>>> problem, again depending on how this will be handled by the JS
>>>>>>>> framework.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> EdB
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> [Bindable] results in extra codegen. Binding expressions with {} is a
>>>>>>>>> whole
>>>>>>>>> other ball of work.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think in FalconJX you might have to modify the node tree in several
>>>>>>>>> places
>>>>>>>>> when you hit a [Bindable] node.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It isn't working correctly in FalconJS either, but my "customer" needs
>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>> so
>>>>>>>>> I'm hacking a fix.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/13 1:28 PM, "Erik de Bruin" <e...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No, not yet. How is this set up in FlexJS? I'm sure I can read
>>>>>>>>>> Metadata
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> Databinding information, so I guess it depends on the requirements
>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> emitted JS if I can easily implement this ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> EdB
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 27, 2013, Alex Harui wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Does FalconJX handle [Bindable]? My "customer" is using it.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/13 11:56 AM, "Michael Schmalle" <apa...@teotigraphix.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Quoting Erik de Bruin <e...@ixsoftware.nl>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Another one popped into my head just now: I have a gut feeling
>>>>>>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>>>>>>> is a bit of circular logic going on in the whole 'backend',
>>>>>>>>>>>> 'blockwalker' and 'emitter' construct. More specifically in the way
>>>>>>>>>>>> the references to them are passed around as arguments in the
>>>>>>>>>>>> constructors for the various classes. But I can't wrap around it
>>>>>>>>>>>> well
>>>>>>>>>>>> enough to figure out whether it's wrong and if so, what might be
>>>>>>>>>>>> done
>>>>>>>>>>>> about it. Don't get me wrong, it works well, it's just that it
>>>>>>>>>>>> somehow
>>>>>>>>>>>> isn't "elegant". And that's in no way a comment on the
>>>>>>>>>>>> effectiveness
>>>>>>>>>>>> or quality of your code, just something I thought I'd share and see
>>>>>>>>>>>> what you think.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Actually I think it works fine. The problem you are facing is with
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> MXML emitter I am sure. This adds complexity to what you are trying
>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>> accomplish and it is circular from the perspective of using AS
>>>>>>>>>>>> within
>>>>>>>>>>>> MXML.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> There is a buffer writer(output stream), a writer, a visitor and
>>>>>>>>>>>> emitter.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Each one takes a dependency of its parent. Trust me, if there is a
>>>>>>>>>>>> child that knows about its parent I am blind. Like I said, the
>>>>>>>>>>>> block
>>>>>>>>>>>> walker is a visitor and the emitter is a visitor. You cannot escape
>>>>>>>>>>>> the fact there is recursion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> If you can think of a more elegant way to set it up, by all means
>>>>>>>>>>>> write a prototype. Remember, I wrote this with an atom bomb under
>>>>>>>>>>>> me
>>>>>>>>>>>> and lighting in the sky, there may be parts that could be
>>>>>>>>>>>> logicalized.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I have another full compiler in Randori that I am going to use as a
>>>>>>>>>>>> proof of concept with compiler plugins and my ASDoc compiler I
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote.
>>>>>>>>>>>> So I guess we both can experiment, we can agree to leave the core
>>>>>>>>>>>> alone for the time being.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> EdB
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 7:41 PM, Erik de Bruin <e...@ixsoftware.nl>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Mike,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Just kidding ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm really happy with FalconJx, once you get to know it it's a
>>>>>>>>>>>> pleasure to work with. I hope my last commits didn't give you any
>>>>>>>>>>>> additional work in your other projects? I did my best to leave all
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> APIs alone.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> There are plenty of TODOs in the code, and I would also like to
>>>>>>>>>>>> suggest some kind of code review or something (I'm not used to
>>>>>>>>>>>> working
>>>>>>>>>>>> in groups, but that seems like a nice thing to do), since I've been
>>>>>>>>>>>> piling on stuff. I did my best to keep everything clean and in line
>>>>>>>>>>>> with the spirit of the rest of the code, but there are some areas
>>>>>>>>>>>> where I'd like to have a second opinion. Like with the code that is
>>>>>>>>>>>> copied between the DOC and JS emitters, seems there might be room
>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>> improvement there. Also of note is the way I've implemented the AS
>>>>>>>>>>>> emitting within the MXML emitter, not really sure if I did the
>>>>>>>>>>>> right
>>>>>>>>>>>> thing there. And finally (not really, but this is all I can think
>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>> for now, after the marathon hacking I did today) there is the whole
>>>>>>>>>>>> "programming to interfaces, not implementations" part that we
>>>>>>>>>>>> nearly
>>>>>>>>>>>> adhere to, but not quite, we might have another look at that as
>>>>>>>>>>>> well.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> EdB
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 7:33 PM, Michael Schmalle
>>>>>>>>>>>> <apa...@teotigraphix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> No thats not what I meant.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I am saying with the Randori project compiler, I have not had to
>>>>>>>>>>> touch the
>>>>>>>>>>>> core framework for weeks and it is compiling 1000's of lines of
>>>>>>>>>>>> code.
>>>>>>>>>>> And
>>>>>>>>>>>> application code now.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> What I meant to say was, the design keeps people in the correct
>>>>>>>>>>> spaces. :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Note; I AM SURE there are as3 bugs coming, its just nice not
>>>>>>>>>>>> having to chase
>>>>>>>>>>>> them right now.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Mike
>>>>>>>>>>> Alex Harui
>>>>>>>>>>> Flex SDK Team
>>>>>>>>>>> Adobe Systems, Inc.
>>>>>>>>>>> http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Alex Harui
>>>>>>>>> Flex SDK Team
>>>>>>>>> Adobe Systems, Inc.
>>>>>>>>> http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Ix Multimedia Software
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jan Luykenstraat 27
>>>>>>>> 3521 VB Utrecht
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> T. 06-51952295
>>>>>>>> I. www.ixsoftware.nl
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Ix Multimedia Software
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jan Luykenstraat 27
>>>>>>> 3521 VB Utrecht
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> T. 06-51952295
>>>>>>> I. www.ixsoftware.nl
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Alex Harui
>>>>> Flex SDK Team
>>>>> Adobe Systems, Inc.
>>>>> http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Ix Multimedia Software
>>>>
>>>> Jan Luykenstraat 27
>>>> 3521 VB Utrecht
>>>>
>>>> T. 06-51952295
>>>> I. www.ixsoftware.nl
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Alex Harui
>> Flex SDK Team
>> Adobe Systems, Inc.
>> http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
>>
>
>
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
