Probably the same with function calls too:
trace(someFunction());
They wanted this to remain:
someFunction();
- Josh
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 6:22 AM, Josh Tynjala <joshtynj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> One thing to keep in mind with stripping out trace() calls is that some
> developers expect any modifications to variables that happen inside the
> arguments to remain. I remember a while back someone at Adobe mentioning
> that people complained when something like this was completely stripped out:
>
> trace(doSomething++);
>
> Because they expected this part to remain:
>
> doSomething++;
>
> - Josh
>
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 12:24 AM, Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> My bad. It does in fact compile down to this:
>>
>> function uM(a){a=Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments,0)}w('org.apach
>> e.flex.utils.Language.trace',uM);
>>
>> So trace does not actually do anything. Great! :-)
>>
>> However, it’s still being called by the client code. (It just does
>> nothing.) Not super important, but it would be nice if at some point we can
>> figure out if there’s a way to strip out the calls completely.
>>
>> > On Jul 12, 2017, at 10:07 AM, Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Oof. I think I’m still waking up. ;-)
>> >
>> > I did not realize what I was looking at with the goog.DEBUG. My
>> recollection is that trace statements are still being used in the release,
>> but I’ll double check that.
>> >
>> >> On Jul 12, 2017, at 9:56 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Well, the goal of using goog.DEBUG in Language.as trace() was to
>> convince
>> >> GCC to eliminate trace(). I haven't checked whether it is working or
>> not.
>> >> Requiring everyone to use goog.DEBUG around trace statements sounds
>> like
>> >> a pain. Probably better to teach the publisher to remove it if GCC
>> can't
>> >> be taught to do it. We visit almost every line of the JS output in the
>> >> publishers right now.
>> >>
>> >> My 2 cents,
>> >> -Alex
>> >>
>> >> On 7/11/17, 11:47 PM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>> On Jul 12, 2017, at 8:20 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Again, though, I think this optimization isn't urgent.
>> >>>
>> >>> I completely agree. That’s why I have not been bringing this up
>> despite
>> >>> it being on my mind. When the discussion came up, I couldn’t help but
>> >>> join. ;-)
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>> goog.DEBUG is already being used in Language.as.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks! I hadn’t noticed. I was missing an import of of goog.DEBUG in
>> >>> COMPILE::JS I’m guessing the imports of goog.bind and goog.global was
>> >>> enough to make goog.DEBUG visible to the compiler in Language.as.
>> >>>
>> >>> Once we’re on this topic, there’s something that I had wanted to
>> bring up
>> >>> for a long time: I think trace statements should disappear in the
>> release
>> >>> JS build. Should we put all the JS trace code inside an if(goog.DEBUG)
>> >>> block?
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks,
>> >>> Harbs
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>
