Fred Thomas did some work in this area about a year ago. In the flex-oem-compiler module that FB (and maybe other IDEs) use to talk to the compiler, he added a FLEXJS_DUAL -js-output-type. Not sure how well it works.
Thinking about this some more we'd have to have the same configuration options available to both compilers which might be a bit strange. Or maybe we can convince the compilers to not complain about unknown config parameters. We'd have to decide on how to reset the library-path for each compile. The JS compile might use different SWCs than the SWF compile. We'd have to select a few conditional compile options that would be different for each compiler. For example, COMPILE::SWF would be true for SWF compiling and false for JS compiling and vice versa, and maybe finding those params on the command-line would have no effect since they would be dictated by the compiler. Thoughts? -Alex On 10/2/16, 1:45 PM, "Josh Tynjala" <joshtynj...@gmail.com> wrote: >That would be ideal! > >- Josh > >On Oct 1, 2016 10:47 PM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > >> One more thought on this: now that COMPJSC can more or less build its >>own >> output instead of relying on COMPC to package its pile of .js files, it >> might be worth experimenting with combining Falcon and FalconJX so COMPC >> can produce a SWC or a SWC with JS files based on some configuration >> parameter. Then there would only be one compiler that produces SWFs or >>JS >> based on some -output-type flag. >> >> Thoughts? >> -Alex >> >> On 10/1/16, 10:18 PM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: >> >> >Hi Chris, >> > >> >When I read this, I realized I already pushed the changes when I pushed >> >some other changes yesterday. If the Maven build didn't blow up, it is >> >probably because it is using its own compile-xx-config.xml files so is >> >still generating a pile of .js files and packaging them up on the SWF >> >COMPC run. >> > >> >-Alex >> > >> >On 10/1/16, 6:10 AM, "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> >>wrote: >> > >> >>Hi Alex, >> >> >> >> >> >>so I guess ideally this change should be done on a feature branch, so >>I >> >>can sort out the Maven issues and we'll merge that back as soon as >>all is >> >>working. I would like to ask you to create a >>"feature-autobuild/"-branch >> >>for that. Just give me a short note what branch the stuff is in and >>I'll >> >>try to sort out the Maven issues. >> >> >> >> >> >>Chris >> > >> >>
