Is anybody else seeing this warning when building Basic .swc? Warning: The definition org.apache.royale.net.utils.IExternalizable depended on by org.apache.royale.collections.ArrayList in the SWC /Users/aharui/git/royale/ant/royale-asjs/frameworks/libs/Collections.swc could not be found
IMO, ArrayList should not implement IExternalizable for PAYG reasons. Some subclass should. And that would likely resolve the build order issue. Thanks, -Alex On 3/7/19, 5:33 PM, "Greg Dove" <[email protected]> wrote: 'I thought that even native AS types (int, number, string) essentially had a class alias in the AMF data and thus XML and Dictionary would too.' I expect they probably have actual traits information in the avm implementation for more general purposes and for consistency. But these are treated specially and are not amf encoded with traits info. This means that registerClassAlias has no effect on the encoding, at least for the standard types - I did check this in flash with a String test, but did not go through all of them. The established serialization/deserialization code itself provides the clues for this. I assume this is done because they are always encoded in what is (presumably) the most compact form. As a quick example, a Boolean is encoded with one byte that serves both as its type and its value. Any implementation using traits or aliasing would be much less compact. So each of these has their own type codes in AMF, and are treated differently to other more general objects (including class instances) which *do* include traits information (or reference it if there has been previous access to that specific traits) in the serialized format and they do require a registered alias to decode back to the class instance instead of anonymous object. iirc from experience, there was a need to have the 'generic' type of a vector.<Class> aliased, and maybe the Vector<Class> variation aliased also, because I think these are another case... but that will be for another time and I will check it then. Vector<int>, <uint> and <Number> are also special-cased, and I also expect they will ignore aliasing, because it would only add unnecessary weight to the encoded content. But I will look in the tamarin code when I get to that (we need a concrete Vector implementation first, or at least some way to tag the Array instances that represent Vectors for runtime checks). On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 1:05 PM Alex Harui <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, maybe you can answer this one question: > > I thought that even native AS types (int, number, string) essentially had > a class alias in the AMF data and thus XML and Dictionary would too. And > then in theory, anyone could change the class alias map to map the alias > for XML to something else. How are native types represented in AMF data? > How does the decode know it is a String, int, Number or XML? > > Thanks, > -Alex > > On 3/7/19, 3:49 PM, "Greg Dove" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Correction: That doesn't mean I *have* thought ...etc > > On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 12:41 PM Greg Dove <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I'm not concerned about download size of AMF code unless support for > > lesser-used classes are significant. > > > > OK, so I think I have that. XML is very PAYG. It only works for > writing if > > you use XML already elsewhere in your project (if you did not do > that, then > > you could never write an XML instance in any case!). And it throws > errors > > if XML is needed for reading, but not included in your project. In > time I > > can review the code and see if I can consolidate/optimize parts of > it as > > well. > > > > I'm not sure I understand why XML and Dictionary (or AMF equivalents) > > can't be implemented as IExternalizable, but I haven't dug deep > enough to > > know. > > > > I can understand why you thought about this approach, but I don't > think it > > is viable. I have been digging kinda deep in this for a while now. > That > > doesn't mean I have not thought of all angles, but I can say that I > have > > spent a bit of time thinking about it. If you want to discuss it > more, feel > > free to open a thread about that and we can both dig deeper. > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 11:29 AM Alex Harui <[email protected] > > > > wrote: > > > >> Royale has a JSONReviver that is a first cut at generating > ValueObjects > >> from JSON. > >> > >> What we don't know is what the relative performance/bandwidth > trade-offs > >> are on AMF vs JSON. However, it really shouldn't matter. Royale > can offer > >> both. I'm just wanting the implementation of AMF support in XML to > be > >> PAYG. I'm not concerned about download size of AMF code unless > support for > >> lesser-used classes are significant. > >> > >> I'm not sure I understand why XML and Dictionary (or AMF > equivalents) > >> can't be implemented as IExternalizable, but I haven't dug deep > enough to > >> know. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> -Alex > >> > >> On 3/7/19, 2:21 PM, "Greg Dove" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Sure Carlos, that's just my view. > >> There are definitely more approaches to 'typing' json than > there used > >> to be > >> (I did not use protobuffer yet but it seems interesting). I > think the > >> case > >> for AMF becomes stronger for 'new' projects if there is an easy > way > >> to move > >> to other things without major changes. > >> But for the record I do like amf :) > >> > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 10:17 AM Carlos Rovira < > >> [email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > Hi Greg > >> > > >> > El jue., 7 mar. 2019 a las 20:41, Greg Dove (< > [email protected]>) > >> > escribió: > >> > > >> > > > >> > > I think AMF in general should be considered legacy support. > I > >> would be > >> > > surprised, for example, if lots of people start using AMF > >> remoting in new > >> > > projects simply because Royale supports it in javascript. I > >> suspect they > >> > > are more likely to use json or protobuf etc for newer > projects. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > don't want to "un-focus" the thread, but I continue thinking > that > >> AMF is > >> > far better for structured programing. > >> > JSON still lacks typing, and that seems to me a big problem. > >> > Maybe speed, nowadays could be almost the same (although I > think > >> when I > >> > search about this topic few months ago that AMF still was more > >> performant) > >> > So, if people uses Royale, and AMF is working great as we have > >> now...don't > >> > see a reason to not go with AMF as a first option. > >> > > >> > Just my 2! ;) > >> > > >> > > >> > > -- > >> > > Carlos Rovira > >> > > > >> > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C7abd857e950f4ba0525108d6a3661c06%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876056285620759&sdata=uNKl4Ik7arHDhy%2B9kTboSHkqbSKgFx7KGet%2B9N%2BlOGI%3D&reserved=0 > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > > >
