On 5/17/16, 11:09 AM, "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> wrote:
>The Manifest files seem to allow making a set of mxml tags be available >using one prefix. The classes referenced by the "js" prefix fire example >contain classes from different packages. You should have to import all >packages individually. And you would be importing all sorts of helper >classes you might not way to have. I'm not sure what you mean by importing all packages. Anyway, it appears the manifest files are used in at least two ways: 1) In -include-namespaces. This is one way we figure out which classes go in a SWC. 2) in -namespaces. And that builds the mapping for MXML as you say. >I guess the manifests are solely used by the mxml compiler. It occurred to me that the manifests might be used by an IDE for code-assist so they don't have to parse the SWC. But I have no proof either way. Do you? > >I guess I shouldn't break anything, if I pack in the manifests in swcs >built by Maven. So I'll give that a try. True, but in the SWC already, there is a catalog.xml file, and in there there is a set of <component> tags and the information there looks identical to what is in the -manifest.xml file, so that's why I'm wondering whether it is worth making the changes to pack the -manifest.xml file into the SWC. Why not just have the compiler read the catalog.xml instead? Why put duplicate information in the SWC? -Alex
