On 6/26/15, 8:46 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <webdoubl...@hotmail.com> wrote: >>Now folks who want to use the externs SWCs to go right at JS have a >> different problem. There is no SWF to catch these issues. If we need a >> more complex transpilar to make these folks happy well, then that’s what >> we’ll have to do. > >Yes, I didn't have only this process (coding in MXML / AS3, create a SWF >and debug in the IDE) in mind, to me folks could code directly for FLEXJS >output type too, for example creating an AS3/JS component library, in >this scenario, the debugging is JS only for the JS part even though they >have the ease to code it in AS3 as we have externs now. > >Remains the tests, I guess we should make people able to test the >produced JS code, for example adding Jasmine as externs ?
Certainly don’t want to rule out any testing frameworks. We have some Selenium tests running now. I’ve pondered whether we can cross-compile FlexUnit or not and use it on the JS side. >> >> Did you test the minified JS in js-release or the debug version in >> js-debug? If js-release, the GCC might have removed it since it didn’t >> see anybody calling it. > >Yes, I have this issue even with the the js-debug Weird. Will have to try it when I find time. This is a vacation week for Adobe so I will be a bit slower. > >>>What about protected methods ? can >>>myClassExtendsObjectInstance["myProtectedMethodFromClassA"]() is >>>supposed >>>throw an Error ? >> >> With someInstance[“someProp”] patterns, I don’t think any compiler >>checks >> for that. > >I wasn't talking about the compile time but the runtime here. And that would be the value of being able to run your AS in a SWF in Flash, just to check that. -Alex
