I'm surprised the ./js/src is hand written as it seems "almost" the same
than what the cross-compile code looks like, if I cross-compile Corre, I
get in IStrand:
org_apache_flex_core_IStrand.prototype.getBeadByType =
function(classOrInterface) {
};
in ./js/src:
/**
* getBeadByType()
*
* @expose
* @param {Object} classOrInterface The type of bead to look for.
* @return {org_apache_flex_core_IBead} The bead.
*/
org_apache_flex_core_IStrand.prototype.getBeadByType =
function(classOrInterface) {};
Even
with -keep-asdoc, I haven't the comments from .as reported, neither I
have the @expose or the type annotation, but if I look at
Application.js, for the strand property, they are the same comment, why ?
/**
* @protected
* @type {org_apache_flex_core_IStrand}
*/
org_apache_flex_core_BeadViewBase.prototype._strand;
and in js/src
/**
* @protected
* @type {Object}
*/
org_apache_flex_core_BeadViewBase.prototype._strand = null;
Another thing, in ClassFactory:
org_apache_flex_core_ClassFactory = function(generator) {
generator = typeof generator !== 'undefined' ? generator : null;
this.generator = generator;
};
in .js/src:
org_apache_flex_core_ClassFactory = function(generator) {
/**
* @private
* @type {Function}
*/
this.generator_ = generator;
this.properties_ = null;
};
Why to use generator_ and properties_, reserved word ?
I
did that as a test before I start other experiments with conditional
compilation to check if I can trust the cross-compiled code.
Frédéric THOMAS
----------------------------------------
> From: aha...@adobe.com
> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [FalconJX FlexJS] JQuery up and running, a nightmare but we now
> have 1.9 in AS
> Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 22:04:23 +0000
>
> In these project directories, you should find:
>
> ./as - AS written against Flash (Sprite, TextField, etc) for SWF output
> ./asjs - AS that is written against abstractions to be used in a SWF or
> cross-compiled to js
> ./js/src - JS that is handwritten to be used on the JS side.
> ./js/out - JS that was cross-compiled from ./asjs
>
> The task is how to get rid of ./js/src and replace it with AS written
> against js.swc. I only tried Network/HTTPService and decided that
> conditional compiling would be better, but I haven’t figured out how to
> deal with different base classes like HTMLElementWrapper in js/src but not
> in as. IOW, UIBase has different base classes at some point (Sprite vs
> HTMLElementWrapper). If conditional compilation works everywhere that’s
> awesome, but if we need some other folder full of .as that only compiles
> against js.swc that’s fine too. We won’t know until we really try it. I
> wasn’t going to try right now so feel free if that’s what you want to work
> on.
>
> What happens in the build script is that ./as and ./asjs are compiled into
> a SWC with COMPC just to make sure it compiles cleanly since it runs
> faster than COMPJSC so we find errors sooner. Then COMPJSC compiles
> ./asjs into ./js/out. Then we run COMPC again to pack the ./js folder
> into the SWC. Someday the COMPJSC probably need to be able to pack the js
> directly into the SWC so we don’t have to run COMPC twice, or maybe we
> should skip the first run of COMPC.
>
> Thanks,
> -Alex
>
>
> On 6/24/15, 1:35 PM, "Michael Schmalle" <teotigraphix...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 4:33 PM, Frédéric THOMAS <webdoubl...@hotmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>> So, now, I guess those Core/js classes have been generated but how ?
>>> what's the process ?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>What are you talking about? As far as I know all the Core/js were and
>>written and need to be back ported to AS now. anything in an out directory
>>was generated.
>>
>>Mike
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>>>
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------
>>>> From: webdoubl...@hotmail.com
>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>>>> Subject: RE: [FalconJX FlexJS] JQuery up and running, a nightmare but
>>>we
>>> now have 1.9 in AS
>>>> Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 21:21:46 +0100
>>>>
>>>> Ok, sorry, I got it !!
>>>>
>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----------------------------------------
>>>>> From: webdoubl...@hotmail.com
>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>>>>> Subject: RE: [FalconJX FlexJS] JQuery up and running, a nightmare but
>>> we now have 1.9 in AS
>>>>> Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 21:03:17 +0100
>>>>>
>>>>>> Try the -keep-asdoc flag on MXMLJSC.
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually, it is what I did, I tried to compile the asjs project
>>>Core/as
>>> to js hoping to get the same result than what I can see in Core/js
>>>>>
>>>>> What it doesn't compiler the same ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ----------------------------------------
>>>>>> From: aha...@adobe.com
>>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [FalconJX FlexJS] JQuery up and running, a nightmare
>>>but
>>> we now have 1.9 in AS
>>>>>> Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 17:53:56 +0000
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Try the -keep-asdoc flag on MXMLJSC. But the deal is that none of
>>>these
>>>>>> .as or .js files factor into the final app since they are all
>>>externs
>>> so
>>>>>> <inject_html> won’t be seen.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So yes, folks can use conditional compile to add stuff, but
>>>requiring a
>>>>>> base class may be easier for the developers. Anyway, we’ll find out
>>> when
>>>>>> more people use it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Alex
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 6/24/15, 10:12 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <webdoubl...@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I’m not opposed to it. IMO, injecting Jquery’s scripts should be
>>>>>>>> automatic. It is in the FlexJS Jquery.swc because you subclass
>>>>>>>> org.apache.flex.jquery.Application and that automatically results
>>>in
>>> the
>>>>>>>> script being added to the head.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This externs-based swc concept is too new to know what is right or
>>>>>>>>wrong.
>>>>>>>> Just keep on coding and we’ll see repeating patterns emerge and
>>>>>>>> encapsulate them. Folks will try it and like it or not. No need to
>>> guess
>>>>>>>> up front. Thanks for figuring it out.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>This is true it is a bit edge case, only for externs based
>>>applications
>>>>>>>at the moment, it could become less true if want to use conditional
>>>>>>>compilation for framework components too IMO and let the creator
>>>build
>>> it
>>>>>>>in one shot, in 2 shots, he could still modify the generated JS to
>>>>>>>include the <inject_html> though.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Btw,
>>>>>>> I had a look at the Closure Compiler Externs Extractor [1] but the
>>>>>>>result of the extracted lib [2] doesn't show any type annotations, I
>>>>>>>guess this is normal but I wonder how those google externs like this
>>> one
>>>>>>>[3] have been built ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Another thing, why when I cross compile IStand, I don't have the
>>> comments
>>>>>>>generated like:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>/**
>>>>>>> * addBead()
>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>> * @expose
>>>>>>> * @param {org_apache_flex_core_IBead} bead The bead to add.
>>>>>>> */
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I've got that only:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>/**
>>>>>>> * org.apache.flex.core.IStrand
>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>> * @fileoverview
>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>> * @suppress {checkTypes}
>>>>>>> */
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>goog.provide('org_apache_flex_core_IStrand');
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>/**
>>>>>>> * @interface
>>>>>>> */
>>>>>>>org_apache_flex_core_IStrand = function() {
>>>>>>>};
>>>>>>>org_apache_flex_core_IStrand.prototype.addBead = function(bead) {
>>>>>>>};
>>>>>>>org_apache_flex_core_IStrand.prototype.getBeadByType =
>>>>>>>function(classOrInterface) {
>>>>>>>};
>>>>>>>org_apache_flex_core_IStrand.prototype.removeBead = function(bead) {
>>>>>>>};
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>/**
>>>>>>> * Metadata
>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>> * @type {Object.<string, Array.<Object>>}
>>>>>>> */
>>>>>>>org_apache_flex_core_IStrand.prototype.FLEXJS_CLASS_INFO = { names:
>>>[{
>>>>>>>name: 'IStrand', qName: 'org_apache_flex_core_IStrand'}] };
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>>>Frédéric THOMAS
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>[1] http://www.dotnetwise.com/Code/Externs/
>>>>>>>[2] http://code.jquery.com/jquery-2.1.4.js
>>>>>>>[3]
>>>>>>>
>>>
>>>https://raw.githubusercontent.com/google/closure-compiler/master/contrib/
>>>e
>>>>>>>xterns/angular-1.3.js
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>----------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> From: aha...@adobe.com
>>>>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [FalconJX FlexJS] JQuery up and running, a nightmare
>>>but
>>>>>>>>we now have 1.9 in AS
>>>>>>>> Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 05:59:45 +0000
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 6/23/15, 10:03 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <webdoubl...@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Yes, it's cool, it simplified my life as well as being able to
>>>modify
>>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>html head from AS, for example here with the dynamic loading of
>>>the
>>>>>>>>>jQuery lib but it seems I'm the only one happy with that :-)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>No interests to add such feature to the framework though ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I’m not opposed to it. IMO, injecting Jquery’s scripts should be
>>>>>>>> automatic. It is in the FlexJS Jquery.swc because you subclass
>>>>>>>> org.apache.flex.jquery.Application and that automatically results
>>>in
>>> the
>>>>>>>> script being added to the head.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This externs-based swc concept is too new to know what is right or
>>>>>>>>wrong.
>>>>>>>> Just keep on coding and we’ll see repeating patterns emerge and
>>>>>>>> encapsulate them. Folks will try it and like it or not. No need to
>>> guess
>>>>>>>> up front. Thanks for figuring it out.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -Alex
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
