Chris I will try to figure out tomorrow how to do this type of thing for maven also. I don't recall seeing the other compiler config settings in pom.xml files when I looked for them so I must have been looking in the wrong place.
-Greg [sent from my phone] On 31/08/2016 6:26 PM, "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> wrote: > What changes are needed fire the examples. Please keep in mind that they > also have to be applied to the Maven build to prevent it from diverging > from the ant one. > > Chris > > > > Von meinem Samsung Galaxy Smartphone gesendet. > > > -------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht -------- > Von: Greg Dove <greg.d...@gmail.com> > Datum: 30.08.16 22:12 (GMT+01:00) > An: dev@flex.apache.org > Betreff: Re: [FlexJX][Falcon] Binding support fixes/improvements > > Thanks for the feedback Alex. > I had also received encouragement from Justin a long time ago to > contribute, I'm happy that I finally got a chance to do so. > > tbh I had not even looked inside manual tests folder yet (there's a lot in > there!), but that definitely sounds like a better place for that example, > it really is a 'manual test'. > > it might require the addition of : > > <arg > value="-compiler.binding-event-handler-interface=org.apache.flex.events. > IEventDispatcher" > /> > <arg > value="-compiler.binding-event-handler-class=org.apache.flex.events. > EventDispatcher" > /> > <arg > value="-compiler.binding-event-handler-event=org.apache.flex.events.Event" > /> > > to the build_example ant file targets, if you didn't already add it > > In terms of my sleeves, I hope to find something more up there within the > next couple of weeks. My regular client work is in a bit of a lull, so I am > making use of the time to get familiar with FlexJS. > I actually already started work on updates in reflection, and only ended up > in bindings because I saw some issues. I will go back to reflection again > next, with a goal of getting identical results in swf and js. Some of the > stuff I added to the JSSessionModel will help with what I needed to do > there anyhow. > > I will definitely add to or update any relevant existing unit-tests on this > next work. > > cheers, > Greg > > > > On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > Hi Greg, > > > > OK, I looked through your patches and applied them to the develop branch. > > I couldn't see anything obviously wrong with it, so great job and thanks > > for contributing! I hope you have more up your sleeve. > > > > FWIW, it would be nice to unit tests in flex-falcon and maybe flex-asjs. > > I'm going to move your example to the manual tests folder in a minute > here > > as I think it belongs there. > > > > Thanks again, > > -Alex > > > > On 8/28/16, 10:10 PM, "Greg Dove" <greg.d...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >Hey Alex, sorry I wasn't clear. > > > > > >"Without a test case to step through the code, I have to say that it is > a > > >bit surprising that you fixed the jx output by fiddling with > > >ASCompilationUnit and ClassDirectiveProcessor instead of the emitters." > > > > > >I meant specifically emitters outside of jx js emitters, and VF2JS was > an > > >example of one I did not touch. AMD is another. I definitely made > changes > > >in the FlexJSEmitter stuff. > > > > > >The ClassDIrectiveProcessor change was just for falcon/swf - I made > > >similar > > >changes for the js emitters, and implemented the IEventDispatcher > > >variation > > >as well as it was not currently implemented in jx. > > > > > >I will be submitting PRs within the next 15 mins. I won't add a lot of > > >text > > >with the PR - so please ask if you have any questions as to why I did > > >things the way I did. Some of it may be a little 'clumsy' perhaps. > > > > > >cheers > > >Greg > > > > > >On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > > > >> Hi Greg, > > >> > > >> Without a test case to step through the code, I have to say that it > is a > > >> bit surprising that you fixed the jx output by fiddling with > > >> ASCompilationUnit and ClassDirectiveProcessor instead of the emitters. > > >> > > >> I guess I'll wait to see the PR. Maybe it will make more sense > then. I > > >> guess maybe you needed to make that change to affect the AST? > > >> > > >> Fundamentally, the compiler creates an AST, then Falcon (the SWF > > >>compiler) > > >> uses Reducers to reduce the AST to ABC code. FalconJX uses > BlockWalkers > > >> and Emitters. There are different emitters for different output > > >>formats. > > >> The vf2js emitters were an attempt to do a straight cross-compile of > the > > >> existing Flex SDK code. It is not being used by FlexJS. > > >> > > >> Looking forward to it, > > >> -Alex > > >> > > >> On 8/28/16, 8:51 PM, "Greg Dove" <greg.d...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > > >> >Thanks Alex, > > >> > > > >> >There are definitely bugs, and I have addressed those that I found in > > >>the > > >> >testbed example I already made a PR for. The others should beWhether > I > > >> >have > > >> >addressed them appropriately or not I can't say, but if the way I > have > > >> >done > > >> >things is not consistent with the compiler architecture or any > general > > >> >java > > >> >coding standards, then at the very least it should provide clues for > > >>you > > >> >or > > >> >someone else for what needs to be done in a more appropriate way. And > > >>if > > >> >it > > >> >is unclear why I did anything in particular please ask. > > >> > > > >> >One of the things I ended up doing was to move the 'extends > > >> >EventDispatcher' implementation from ASCompilationUnit to > > >> >ClassDIrectiveProcessor for falcon and to provide a corresponding > > >> >implementation in jx. There seemed to be times when that original > > >> >implementation was not being applied when it ought to have been, and > it > > >> >also seemed like ClassDirectiveProcessor was a more natural home for > > >>it, > > >> >alongside the other 'implements IEventDispatcher' implementation for > > >> >binding support. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> >In terms of your suggestion about asking questions... I appreciate > your > > >> >intent here, I think most people prefer not to ask stupid questions > > >>(even > > >> >if there is a culture of 'no such thing as a stupid question'), and I > > >> >needed to get my head around the compiler a bit first before asking > too > > >> >many questions, otherwise most of the questions would probably be > > >>stupid > > >> >ones about how it works! > > >> >I used this exercise to help me understand the basics, and I > personally > > >> >find this approach is much better for for me to learn anything new > over > > >> >asking lots of questions (it may not be the most efficient to arrive > at > > >> >the > > >> >knowledge, but it helps me get to a deeper understanding faster I > > >>think). > > >> >Also, although all you guys are great at responding quickly here, I > am > > >> >used > > >> >to the immediacy of some form of chat, otherwise I am usually already > > >> >trying to answer my questions myself, particularly if I am already > > >>focused > > >> >on it. IRC is a good option here that some OS teams use, because it > is > > >> >possible to set up some logging (and therefore can be made > searchable, > > >>if > > >> >required). But some people find IRC a bit 'old school' :). > > >> > > > >> >I will likely ask more questions in the future, but I do have a more > > >> >general question now: > > >> > > > >> >Also, in terms of changing emitter support in jx for js output, I > have > > >>not > > >> >touched anything outside of js emitters - is that usually ok? I don't > > >>even > > >> >know what vf2js or some of the others are for.... but I do see that > > >>some > > >> >of > > >> >the various emitter classes have duplicated or similar code in parts > of > > >> >them. I did wonder about whether I was supposed to do anything > > >>elsewhere > > >> >as > > >> >well, but as I did not really understand it, I chose to stop > > >>wondering. :) > > >> > > > >> >cheers, > > >> >Greg > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> >On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 5:40 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> > wrote: > > >> > > > >> >> Sounds great! Looking forward to it. > > >> >> > > >> >> It might be better in the future if you ask more questions as you > go > > >> >> along. I think the compiler already does IEventDispatcher > although I > > >> >> wouldn't be surprised if the current code has bugs, so discussing > > >>early > > >> >> can help make sure you are spending your cycles appropriately. > > >> >> > > >> >> Thanks, > > >> >> -Alex > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> > > > > >
