Yeah, it makes sense to use JSRoyale with js-config.xml to exclude parts of the 
framework referenced in royale-config.xml. Unexpected changes to js-config.xml 
in the future could possibly cause some surprises, but if that's probably not a 
huge risk. This would be a decent exception to the rule.

- Josh

On 2018/09/11 17:47:41, Alex Harui <[email protected]> wrote: 
> FWIW, I think the framework swcs are built using the config Piotr is using 
> since want JSRoyale output, but we don't want to assume SWC dependencies 
> specified in royale-config (because we are building the SWCs in those 
> dependencies).
> 
> However, you are correct for most SWCs that application developers will be 
> building.
> 
> Of course, I could be wrong...
> -Alex
> 
> On 9/11/18, 10:21 AM, "Josh Tynjala" <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>     Hey Piotr,
>     
>     There's something a little strange in your compiler options that you 
> should probably fix:
>     
>     You're specifying JSRoyale and js-config.xml together, but these two 
> aren't necessarily compatible. Here's what you have in your compiler options:
>     
>     -compiler.targets=SWF,JSRoyale
>     -load-config=d:\royale_nightly_js_swf\frameworks\js-config.xml
>     
>     However, it should either be this:
>     
>     -compiler.targets=SWF,JSRoyale
>     -load-config=d:\royale_nightly_js_swf\frameworks\royale-config.xml
>     
>     or maybe this (depending on if you want Royale components or pure JS):
>     
>     -compiler.targets=SWF,JS
>     -load-config=d:\royale_nightly_js_swf\frameworks\js-config.xml
>     
>     Basically, you use JSRoyale with royale-config.xml, or you use JS with 
> js-config.xml. The JSRoyale and JS targets produce very similar output, but 
> it's best not to assume that they're exactly the same in all cases.
>     
>     (As a side note, it's worth mentioning that there's also the JSNode 
> target that's meant to work with node-config.xml. JSNode also produces 
> different output than JSRoyale or JS because it generates code for Node.js)
>     
>     One last thing. In order to use -compiler.targets=SWF,JS to build a SWC, 
> you'll need my compiler changes from yesterday. For some reason, that was 
> throwing an exception, while -compiler.targets=SWF,JSRoyale did not. I 
> suspect that this may be why you were using JSRoyale instead of JS, but now 
> JS should work too!
>     
>     - Josh
>     
>     On 2018/09/11 09:45:52, Piotr Zarzycki <[email protected]> wrote: 
>     > Hi Guys,
>     > 
>     > I'm having difficulties with using created Royale SWC in some project. I
>     > have two projects. (I've uploaded them on onedrive so you can try it
>     > yourself).
>     > 
>     > Using SWF version of prepared swc I'm able to build project with
>     > compiler.targets=SWF. Unfortunately using JS version of that SWC I'm not
>     > able to build project with it. [1]
>     > 
>     > 1. Library itself [2] - It contains configurations 
> compile-swf-config.xml
>     > and compile-js-config.xml. Folder "bin" has swc JS and SWF version.
>     > 
>     > 2. Consumer of library [3] - This one is configured with Moonshine and
>     > VSCode.
>     > 
>     > I'm building JS and SWF version of SWC using following command lines [4]
>     > 
>     > Does anyone is seeing what could be wrong ? Those command lines [4] are
>     > based on how Royale is building swcs Basic, Jewel etc.
>     > 
>     > [1] 
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apache.org%2FtvhY&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5a8dfde09c3a43c1dc5708d6180b0bf9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636722833090144497&sdata=8wNnZdcsKAwMUSPkEMln4lIYant36T0FNpCwbjhxE7w%3D&reserved=0
>     > [2] 
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2F1drv.ms%2Fu%2Fs!ApVpLyjpHDC2hZwM9OY5sNinrirEvQ&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5a8dfde09c3a43c1dc5708d6180b0bf9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636722833090144497&sdata=p9FuFZl3Q69unFF%2F%2BWvoiQ1%2BgFgmKK432O8yfpSxHeI%3D&reserved=0
>     > [3] 
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2F1drv.ms%2Fu%2Fs!ApVpLyjpHDC2hZwNgXaX_G_qZip39g&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5a8dfde09c3a43c1dc5708d6180b0bf9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636722833090144497&sdata=j8eS3h60ZTJ%2Bdq5hmI1Fa1aLoZ6FJfYFXJzyasns054%3D&reserved=0
>     > [4] 
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apache.org%2FOtDR&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5a8dfde09c3a43c1dc5708d6180b0bf9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636722833090144497&sdata=m7b68csRqLF0nnRHOemiNmryFekbHgUGgLFTNkSxZUQ%3D&reserved=0
>     > 
>     > Thanks,
>     > -- 
>     > 
>     > Piotr Zarzycki
>     > 
>     > Patreon: 
> *https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patreon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5a8dfde09c3a43c1dc5708d6180b0bf9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636722833090144497&sdata=ua2LEaq3tv5oEmOvalMBlT4q8CPJRUysSv5Bocy39QM%3D&reserved=0
>     > 
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patreon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5a8dfde09c3a43c1dc5708d6180b0bf9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636722833090144497&sdata=ua2LEaq3tv5oEmOvalMBlT4q8CPJRUysSv5Bocy39QM%3D&reserved=0>*
>     > 
>     
> 
> 

Reply via email to