Ok. I just checked in my changes to develop but with the Bindable Interface problem I only comitted the "null-check" version. So no worries ... nothing is fundamentally changed.
I also migrated the other things I did as noone had an objection to the changes I did in order to enable advanced-telemetry. Chris -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com] Gesendet: Montag, 3. November 2014 19:00 An: dev@flex.apache.org Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: [FALCON] Bindable interfaces? On 11/3/14, 9:51 AM, "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> wrote: >Well I don't have any objections to leaving it in ... I just noticed >that it definitely needs some hardening against NPEs. Feel free to help add more NPE handling. I just haven’t hit those scenarios otherwise I would have added some handling myself. >I was just assuming that the code could be removed as it didn't have >any effect on the Falcon output. Again, I am not an expert on this stuff, but the code we’re discussing is in handleSyntaxTreeRequest which may or may not affect the output of the bindable class but I think is involved in compile-time checking for APIs. The code you didn’t touch is part of handleABCBytesRequest which is all about what gets output for Falcon, but not FalconJX, so that’s why your tests may not have hit the use for that code. -Alex
