These warnings look new:
Jul 16, 2019 6:55:16 PM com.google.javascript.jscomp.LoggerErrorManager println
WARNING: externs/dialogPolyfill.js:15: WARNING - accessing name dialogPolyfill
in externs has no effect. Perhaps you forgot to add a var keyword?
dialogPolyfill = function() {
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Jul 16, 2019 6:55:16 PM com.google.javascript.jscomp.LoggerErrorManager println
WARNING: externs/dialogPolyfill.js:15: WARNING - variable dialogPolyfill is
undeclared
dialogPolyfill = function() {
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Jul 16, 2019 6:55:16 PM com.google.javascript.jscomp.LoggerErrorManager println
WARNING: externs/dialogPolyfill.js:23: WARNING - name dialogPolyfill is not
defined in the externs.
dialogPolyfill.registerDialog = function(dialog) {
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Jul 16, 2019 6:55:16 PM com.google.javascript.jscomp.LoggerErrorManager println
WARNING: externs/hljs.js:19: WARNING - accessing name hljs in externs has no
effect. Perhaps you forgot to add a var keyword?
hljs = function() {
^^^^
Jul 16, 2019 6:55:16 PM com.google.javascript.jscomp.LoggerErrorManager println
WARNING: externs/hljs.js:19: WARNING - variable hljs is undeclared
hljs = function() {
^^^^
Jul 16, 2019 6:55:16 PM com.google.javascript.jscomp.LoggerErrorManager println
WARNING: externs/hljs.js:27: WARNING - name hljs is not defined in the externs.
hljs.highlightBlock = function(block) {
^^^^
Any thoughts on this?
> On Jul 15, 2019, at 10:32 PM, Josh Tynjala <joshtynj...@bowlerhat.dev> wrote:
>
> Hey folks,
>
> I just pushed some commits to royale-compiler and royale-asjs, and I wanted
> to add a little explanation, and some possible troubleshooting advice if
> anything seems to have broken in your apps.
>
> My work over the last week has been to fix an issue related to specifying
> dependencies when compiling libraries for JS. As you probably know, the
> compiler supports two options for adding libraries as dependencies,
> library-path and external-library-path. The library-path compiler option
> basically says "include all classes that I use from this SWC in the final
> output". It's typically what you use when compiling an app that uses a
> library. The external-library-path compiler option basically says "if I use
> anything from this SWC, check that I'm using the types correctly, but don't
> include any of classes from this SWC in the final output".
>
> If you're compiling an app, you typically use library-path for everything.
> You use external-library-path only for dependencies like
> playerglobal.swc/airglobal.swc in Flash or typedef SWCs in JS. Basically,
> for an app project, external-library-path is for classes that are provided
> natively by the Flash runtime or a web browser, like Chrome or Firefox.
>
> When compiling libraries, external-library-path is also used to prevent the
> compiler from creating a "fat" library that stuffs in all of the
> dependencies. Let's say that you have a library, A.swc. It provides some
> core functionality that is needed by both B.swc and C.swc. When we compile
> B.swc and C.swc, we don't want the classes from A.swc duplicated in both of
> them. So we add A.swc to the external-library-path when compiling B.swc or
> C.swc. Then, if you use those SWCs when compiling an app, you need to add
> A.swc, B.swc, and C.swc to the library-path.
>
> To put that in Royale terms, A.swc is something like LanguageJS.swc or
> CoreJS.swc. They're some of our lowest-level SWCs in the framework. B.swc
> and C.swc are more like BasicJS.swc or JewelJS.swc, and they tend to share
> multiple classes from the lower-level stuff.
>
> Up until now, library-path and external-library-path were a little quirky
> when compiling to JS. It was related to the goog.provide() and
> goog.require() calls that you might have seen in the generated JS. These
> are from the module system that we use in Royale. The compiler didn't know
> how to differentiate between classes that had goog.provide() and classes
> that were typedefs for JS libraries. It treated everything on the
> external-library-path as a typedef, and this led to missing goog.require()
> calls in the generated JS. To work around this, when we specified
> dependencies in our framework SWCs, we used library-path to ensure that
> goog.require() would be used.
>
> This workaround of using library-path led to "fat" SWCs that contained all
> of their dependencies. Low-level classes in SWCs like CoreJS were
> duplicated in higher-level SWCs. This led to the compiler getting confused
> about exactly where a class was defined.
>
> This has resulted in some minor issues here and there, but nothing too
> major until recently. However, Harbs noticed the other day that it caused
> the compiler to copy extra default CSS into apps from SWCs that you may not
> have been using. So, you might build an app with the Basic components, but
> you'd get extra CSS from Jewel or MaterialDesignLite. This could mess up
> your app's styling pretty dramatically.
>
> I updated the compiler to better detect when a class needs goog.require()
> and when it's a typedef. If that class comes from a SWC, the compiler knows
> to check for an included file like, js/out/com/example/MyClass.js. If the
> generated JS is there, goog.require() is necessary. If it's missing, it's
> treated as a typedef class instead. If the class is an .as source file
> instead, the compiler looks for the @externs asdoc tag to determine if it's
> a typedef class (and everything else needs goog.require() instead).
>
> By the way, if we ever support other module systems, it shouldn't be too
> difficult to extend this code to detect different SWC layouts for each
> module system.
>
> If your project is an app, this change should not cause any problems.
> You're probably using library-path and external-library-path correctly.
>
> If you have a project that is a library, you should check your compiler
> options to see if you are using library-path and external-library-path
> correctly. If your library depends on another library, you probably should
> be using external-library-path because you don't want a "fat" SWC. In other
> words, if you're using library-path in a library project, you probably need
> to change that to external-library-path.
>
> If you have any custom typedef SWCs, you may want to recompile them. At one
> point, the compiler had a bug where classes in typedef SWCs were being
> incorrectly added to the "js/out" folder in the SWC, but that was
> incorrect. They should have been placed in an "externs" folder instead. The
> compiler handles this correctly now, but old typedef SWCs may look like
> goog.require() SWCs instead. To be sure, you can open a SWC file in any
> program that can read ZIP files, and you'll see the internal folder
> structure. If a typedef SWC has a "js/out" folder, it's not going to work
> properly.
>
> If you're working directly out of the royale-compiler and royale-asjs Git
> repos, be sure to update and rebuild them both. The nightly builds should
> be updated shortly.
>
> When you build any apps, be sure to clean first, just to be sure that you
> have the latest JS files from the SWCs.
>
> If you run into any other problems with these changes, please let me know.
> I'll get them fixed right away!
>
> --
> Josh Tynjala
> Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
