We might keep around a Language class for things "every" app will need (is/as, maybe some coercions). But trace, sortOn, Vector should be PAYG.
-Alex On 7/17/17, 10:20 PM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >Another reason to not add to Language is that it would make Language >depend on XML. > >I’ll try to write these functions today. > >I don’t mind breaking up utility classes, but the Language class will >need changes to the compiler. It looks like it’s more than just replacing >org.apache.flex.utils.Language with org.apache.flex.utils (or something >like that) because the compiler needs to know when to add goog.requires >for each of the utility functions. > >> On Jul 18, 2017, at 5:19 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> >>wrote: >> >> IMO, toXML() is more PAYG. We really shouldn't keep adding to Language. >> >> I'm going to figure out why your standalone functions like callLater, >> assert, etc, aren't handled correctly then we should seriously think >>about >> finding a volunteer to break up these utility classes into utility >> functions since that would be more PAYG. >> >> -Alex >> >> On 7/17/17, 2:55 PM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com >><mailto:harbs.li...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >>> I believe you are right in Flash. Same for XMLList(). >>> >>> I’d be happy to write the functions. Should we do a top level toXML() >>>or >>> Language.XML() and Language.XMLList()? >>> >>> The latter seems to fit the pattern for the rest of the language >>>features. >>> >>>> On Jul 18, 2017, at 12:24 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Pretty sure in AS for Flash, you can write (without "new"): >>>> >>>> var herbs:XML = XML(someXMLListWithOneElement); >>>> >>>> And it will "do the right thing". >>>> >>>> I guess we will have to create Language.XML or add a static toXML() on >>>> XML >>>> and have the compiler catch the top-level function call and redirect >>>>it >>>> to >>>> that conversion function. >>>> >>>> Thoughts? >>>> -Alex >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fhelp.ad >>>>ob >>>><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fhelp.a >>>>dob> >>>> e.com >>>><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fe.com% >>>>2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C5382fcba9a4c46fe99a508d4cd9cc9d1%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438 >>>>794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636359520659004208&sdata=puTvZn8XbISXRNbPzi >>>>Kdy2QHDDh6OxiOhJwU4uz%2FtzM%3D&reserved=0>%2Fen_US%2FFlashPlatform%2Fre >>>>ference%2Factionscript%2F3%2Fpackage&da >>>> >>>>ta=02%7C01%7C%7Ca738e996dd3d4b05159108d4cd5e8cc2%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794ae >>>>d2 >>>> >>>>c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636359253349448225&sdata=7YC%2B75edAjohFvpCU3Sd4d% >>>>2B >>>> RvWJYLlYGpyG5FHK5teQ%3D&reserved=0. >>>> html#XML() >>>> >>>> On 7/17/17, 12:32 PM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I just tried to see if it might work, but I get an error. Obviously >>>>> that’s a no-no... >>>>> >>>>> [java] >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>/Users/harbs/Documents/ApacheFlex/flex-asjs/frameworks/projects/XML/sr >>>>>c/ >>>>> ma >>>>> in/flex/XML.as(317): col: 13 A return value is not allowed in a >>>>> constructor. >>>>> [java] >>>>> [java] return (xml as XMLList).toXML(); >>>>> >>>>>> On Jul 17, 2017, at 10:28 PM, Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I don’t think so. Write one where? How? We already have a top level >>>>>> XML >>>>>> constructor. >>>>>> >>>>>> Wouldn’t the compiler output: >>>>>> XML(myXML) >>>>>> >>>>>> as: >>>>>> org.apache.flex.utils.Language.as(myXML,XML)? >>>>>> >>>>>> I’m pretty sure the only way to instantiate an XML object is to use >>>>>> new. >>>>>> >>>>>> Well, I just tried XML(myXMLList) and it does not call Language.as. >>>>>>It >>>>>> keeps the code exactly as it was and invokes the XML constructor >>>>>>with >>>>>> the XMLList as the parameter. >>>>>> >>>>>> Of course that goes totally haywire this refers to window and none >>>>>>of >>>>>> the code makes any sense. I have no idea if a constructor can return >>>>>> something else in the middle of it. (i.e. if an XMLList is fed to >>>>>>the >>>>>> XML constructor, call toXML() on the XMLList and return that.) >>>>>> >>>>>> Harbs >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jul 17, 2017, at 10:08 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I thought we (you) already wrote one. If not, we won't we need >>>>>>>one? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -Alex >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 7/17/17, 12:01 PM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks for the pointer. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I changed the emitter to output indexed access. It seems to work. >>>>>>>> :-) >>>>>>>> (committed) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I’m not sure what you mean about the top level XML function. How >>>>>>>> does >>>>>>>> that work in Javascript? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Jul 17, 2017, at 7:47 PM, Alex Harui >>>>>>>>><aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You can try #2 by changing ForEachEmitter.java. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> For the general problem, we should probably just use the XML() >>>>>>>>> top-level >>>>>>>>> function to "coerce" XMLList to XML. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> My 2 cents, >>>>>>>>> -Alex >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 7/17/17, 9:23 AM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> That is a fourth option. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> In terms of overhead, option #2 is probably cheapest and option >>>>>>>>>>#4 >>>>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>>> probably most expensive. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> What’s the difference in terms of difficulty of changing the >>>>>>>>>> compiler? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I agree with the general problem. It could be that we should to >>>>>>>>>>a >>>>>>>>>> function to XMLList toXML() (or something like that) where it >>>>>>>>>> would >>>>>>>>>> return an XML element if it’s a single and throw an error >>>>>>>>>> otherwise. >>>>>>>>>> Then >>>>>>>>>> anytime there is an XMLList assignment to XML, the compiler >>>>>>>>>>could >>>>>>>>>> add >>>>>>>>>> .toXML(). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Harbs >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 17, 2017, at 7:11 PM, Alex Harui >>>>>>>>>>> <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> IMO, this points out a generic problem where in ActionScript: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> var harbs:XML = SomeXMLListWithOneElement; >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> would auto-coerce the XMLList to XML by grabbing the one >>>>>>>>>>>element. >>>>>>>>>>> So >>>>>>>>>>> we >>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with that some day. But there is probably a quick >>>>>>>>>>> fix in >>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>> generated code for "for each" where we just generate: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> var foo = foreachiter57_target.child(foreachiter57)[0]; >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>>>>>>> -Alex >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 7/17/17, 3:40 AM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I discovered an issue with “for each” in the XML classes: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Currently, for each does the following: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The following AS code: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> var fooList:XMLList = getFooList(); >>>>>>>>>>>> for each(var foo:XML in fooList){ >>>>>>>>>>>> doSomethingWithFoo(foo); >>>>>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> outputs the following JS: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> var /** @type {XMLList} */ fooList = this.getFooList(); >>>>>>>>>>>> var foreachiter57_target = fooList; >>>>>>>>>>>> for (var foreachiter57 in foreachiter57_target.elementNames()) >>>>>>>>>>>> { >>>>>>>>>>>> var foo = foreachiter57_target.child(foreachiter57); >>>>>>>>>>>> { >>>>>>>>>>>> this.doSomethingWithFoo(foo); >>>>>>>>>>>> }} >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The problem is with the line: >>>>>>>>>>>> var foo = foreachiter57_target.child(foreachiter57); >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> foo should be of type XML. According to the ECMA spec for E4X, >>>>>>>>>>>> XML.prototype.child and XMLList.prototype.child both ALWAYS >>>>>>>>>>>> return an >>>>>>>>>>>> XMLList and not an XML object. This is true even if the >>>>>>>>>>>>argument >>>>>>>>>>>> fed >>>>>>>>>>>> into >>>>>>>>>>>> child is an integer. So myXMLList.child(“0”) will return an >>>>>>>>>>>> XMLList >>>>>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>>>> one XML element which is the first element of the original >>>>>>>>>>>> XMLList. >>>>>>>>>>>> We >>>>>>>>>>>> need the actual XML object at the specified index without the >>>>>>>>>>>> XMLList >>>>>>>>>>>> wrapper. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> There are three ways I can see to fix this problem: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Ignore the spec and return an XML object when the argument >>>>>>>>>>>>is >>>>>>>>>>>> an >>>>>>>>>>>> integer. >>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Change the compiler output to: var foo = >>>>>>>>>>>> foreachiter57_target[foreachiter57]; Bracket access to XMLList >>>>>>>>>>>> returns >>>>>>>>>>>> an >>>>>>>>>>>> XML object. >>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Add a new function to use instead of child() (i.e. >>>>>>>>>>>> getChild()). >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Harbs >
