What class in Core needs this dependency? I think one drawback is that
users of that class will need to add node.swc to their project
dependencies. But I don't think every consumer of Core will need node.swc.
But first, why didn't window["process"] work? In theory Falcon will let
you access anything off of window. We could also add global if we want.
Or maybe we should only allow global and have some bootstrap code that
maps global to window?
-Alex
On 7/4/17, 2:09 PM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Actually, I see that the Node typedefs has all the process declarations
>in global.js.
>
>Is there an issue with adding a dependency in CoreJS to node.swc?
>
>Should a class that has this dependency go somewhere else? (I don’t
>really see an issue with adding the dependency, but I’m throwing this out
>in case I’m missing something.)
>
>Harbs
>
>> On Jul 5, 2017, at 12:00 AM, Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Looks like it.
>>
>> I see this in missing.js:
>>
>> /**
>> * @export
>> * This gets mapped to org.apache.flex.utils.Language.trace() by the
>>compiler
>> * @param {...} rest
>> */
>> function trace(rest) {}
>>
>> /**
>> * @type {!Console}
>> * @const
>> */
>> var console;
>>
>>
>> I guess I can add another one like so:
>>
>> /**
>> * @type {!Process}
>> * @const
>> */
>> var process;
>>
>> However, it seems like a drag to have to add a typedef every time a
>>developer needs to check for the existence of a global that we did not
>>think of.
>>
>>> On Jul 4, 2017, at 9:13 PM, Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks. Here’s what I see:
>>>
>>> if(typeof window !== "undefined")
>>> {
>>> theConsole = window.console;
>>> }
>>> else if(typeof console !== "undefined")
>>> {
>>> theConsole = console;
>>> }
>>>
>>> Did you define console in a typedef maybe?
>>>
>>> I’m thinking that Falcon should really allow undefined variables when
>>>used with “typeof”.
>>>
>>> Truth be told, I really need to do something like one of these:
>>> if(typeof (process) != 'undefined' && {}.toString.call(process) ==
>>>'[object process]’)
>>> or:
>>> if(typeof process != 'undefined' && process &&
>>>process.constructor.name == "process”)
>>>
>>> Of course every reference to process causes a compiler error. I wonder
>>>if there’s some way to tell the compiler to accept it without
>>>complaining…
>>>
>>>> On Jul 4, 2017, at 8:54 PM, Josh Tynjala <joshtynj...@gmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I don't remember exactly what I did, but in order to get trace()
>>>>working in
>>>> Node.js, I had to figure out how to find the console object on window
>>>> versus global. I feel like I remember using typeof, but maybe it was
>>>> something else. Take a look at the implementation of Language.trace()
>>>>to
>>>> see what I did.
>>>>
>>>> - Josh
>>>>
>>>> On Jul 4, 2017 5:26 AM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I’m trying to figure out how to solve this dilemma:
>>>>>
>>>>> Browsers attach global variables to window.
>>>>>
>>>>> Node.js attaches globals to global.
>>>>>
>>>>> I’m trying to check for the existence of a global called process. In
>>>>>JS,
>>>>> you’d generally do that by checking typeof process == ‘undefined’.
>>>>>Falcon
>>>>> does not allow you to do that and complains that process is an
>>>>>undefined
>>>>> property. In the browser you can use window[“process”] == undefined
>>>>>and in
>>>>> node you can (theoretically) use global[“process”] == undefined. I
>>>>>can’t
>>>>> think of a generic way to do this though.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>> Harbs
>>>
>>
>
