Hi Greg, I don't think I understand your goals here. I didn't know there were bugs in the current code, but I'm not surprised either. I was just trying to get some other code to work.
Why do we need to change the typedefs? IMO, the typedefs should represent what the browser actually supports and the compiler and Language should deal with any ActionScript differences. The emitters are where I think that should happen. The RoyaleEmitters generate Royale-specific code, but other emitters like the GoogEmitter should allow someone to use Google Closure Library and write directly at the browser APIs (not the Flash APIs). My 2 cents, -Alex On 11/8/18, 11:06 PM, "Greg Dove" <[email protected]> wrote: I see some discussions about messages not getting through on the list today, so I can't be sure the last one or this one got through. I pushed the commit, but please revert if if you don't want it in the release yet. thanks, Greg On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 3:48 PM Greg Dove <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Alex, > > I checked and only now realized that you made the change in Language.as > quite recently to add support for actionscript Array.sort method signature > variations to javascript - I looked in Language.as and saw the support for > it but did not check when it was added until just now - last month! I hope > I did not double up on the compler side which you may have already begun as > well... I have a fix ready for the 2 method signatures that need to use > that Language.sort call with the options argument, and new tests in > compiler-jx for that. > As I suspect you are aware, currently it gives wrong, but errorless, code > in some places, like mx.colllections.Sort, so I am keen to get this in. > > Does anything else need doing for typedefs - do I need to update an > existing method signature, and if so, how? (I didn't do anything in > typedefs so far) > > ...if so, I *think* it just needs the optional options arg... > > If the typedefs change can wait, or is not needed, please let me know and > I will push this fix asap, otherwise please point me in the direction of > what I need to do for typedefs. > > thanks, > Greg > > > > > > >
