Thanks again, I believe it should be fixed now, Brian. I think there was some unnecessary declaration output being written previously that should not have been - for the generated 'operations' Object of the RemoteObject in this case, but perhaps there could have been other cases where this was happening.
On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 7:50 AM Greg Dove <greg.d...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Ok I repro'ed that. Not sure how I missed it at all... unless maybe I made > some minor changes after my last test of the examples. Will figure this out. > > > On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 7:40 AM Greg Dove <greg.d...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Thanks for letting me know Brian. I had run all the examples locally as >> part of my testing before pushing the changes, and wasn't seeing any >> problems so I must have missed something. Will take a look very shortly. >> Usually I wait for the remote builds to run as a final check but I wasn't >> able to do that this time. >> >> >> On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 6:44 AM Brian Raymes <brian.ray...@teotech.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I will keep you updated over the coming weeks if I run into the same or >>> similar issue. >>> >>> In the meantime, >>> https://github.com/apache/royale-compiler/commit/96b42e5a980c1d919d0c3a620c500f7a0aff2e9d >>> seems to be breaking my ability to build royale-asjs with examples: >>> >>> Specifically, MXRoyale / RemoteObjectAMFTest errors for the following >>> reason causing the rest of the build to fail: >>> >>> Executing MXMLC in tool group Royale with args: >>> [-load-config=/mnt/c/dev/royale-asjs/examples/mxroyale/RemoteObjectAMFTest/target/compile-app-config.xml, >>> -js-output=/mnt/c/dev/royale-asjs/examples/mxroyale/RemoteObjectAMFTest/target/javascript, >>> -compiler.targets=JSRoyale, >>> /mnt/c/dev/royale-asjs/examples/mxroyale/RemoteObjectAMFTest/src/main/royale/App.mxml] >>> /mnt/c/dev/royale-asjs/examples/mxroyale/RemoteObjectAMFTest/src/main/royale/App.mxml >>> line 20 column 0 Error: Internal error in ASBlockWalker subsystem, when >>> generating code for: >>> /mnt/c/dev/royale-asjs/examples/mxroyale/RemoteObjectAMFTest/src/main/royale/App.mxml >>> line 20 column 0: java.lang.NullPointerException >>> at >>> org.apache.royale.compiler.internal.codegen.mxml.royale.MXMLRoyaleEmitter.emitPropertyDecls(MXMLRoyaleEmitter.java:1475) >>> at >>> org.apache.royale.compiler.internal.codegen.mxml.royale.MXMLRoyaleEmitter.emitDocument(MXMLRoyaleEmitter.java:884) >>> at >>> org.apache.royale.compiler.internal.codegen.mxml.royale.MXMLRoyaleBlockWalker.visitDocument(MXMLRoyaleBlockWalker.java:69) >>> at >>> org.apache.royale.compiler.internal.visitor.mxml.MXMLNodeSwitch.handle(MXMLNodeSwitch.java:89) >>> at >>> org.apache.royale.compiler.internal.codegen.mxml.MXMLBlockWalker.walk(MXMLBlockWalker.java:156) >>> at >>> org.apache.royale.compiler.internal.codegen.mxml.royale.MXMLRoyaleBlockWalker.visitFile(MXMLRoyaleBlockWalker.java:61) >>> at >>> org.apache.royale.compiler.internal.visitor.mxml.MXMLNodeSwitch.handle(MXMLNodeSwitch.java:95) >>> at >>> org.apache.royale.compiler.internal.codegen.mxml.MXMLBlockWalker.walk(MXMLBlockWalker.java:156) >>> at >>> org.apache.royale.compiler.internal.codegen.mxml.MXMLBlockWalker.visitCompilationUnit(MXMLBlockWalker.java:187) >>> at >>> org.apache.royale.compiler.internal.codegen.mxml.MXMLWriter.writeTo(MXMLWriter.java:69) >>> at >>> org.apache.royale.compiler.clients.MXMLJSCRoyale.compile(MXMLJSCRoyale.java:411) >>> at >>> org.apache.royale.compiler.clients.MXMLJSCRoyale._mainNoExit(MXMLJSCRoyale.java:259) >>> at >>> org.apache.royale.compiler.clients.MXMLJSCRoyale.mainNoExit(MXMLJSCRoyale.java:216) >>> at >>> org.apache.royale.compiler.clients.MXMLJSC._mainNoExit(MXMLJSC.java:363) >>> at >>> org.apache.royale.compiler.clients.MXMLJSC.mainNoExit(MXMLJSC.java:298) >>> at >>> org.apache.royale.compiler.clients.MXMLJSC.execute(MXMLJSC.java:228) >>> at org.apache.royale.maven.BaseMojo.execute(BaseMojo.java:383) >>> at >>> org.apache.royale.maven.CompileAppMojo.execute(CompileAppMojo.java:112) >>> at >>> org.apache.maven.plugin.DefaultBuildPluginManager.executeMojo(DefaultBuildPluginManager.java:137) >>> at >>> org.apache.maven.lifecycle.internal.MojoExecutor.execute(MojoExecutor.java:210) >>> at >>> org.apache.maven.lifecycle.internal.MojoExecutor.execute(MojoExecutor.java:156) >>> at >>> org.apache.maven.lifecycle.internal.MojoExecutor.execute(MojoExecutor.java:148) >>> at >>> org.apache.maven.lifecycle.internal.LifecycleModuleBuilder.buildProject(LifecycleModuleBuilder.java:117) >>> at >>> org.apache.maven.lifecycle.internal.LifecycleModuleBuilder.buildProject(LifecycleModuleBuilder.java:81) >>> at >>> org.apache.maven.lifecycle.internal.builder.singlethreaded.SingleThreadedBuilder.build(SingleThreadedBuilder.java:56) >>> at >>> org.apache.maven.lifecycle.internal.LifecycleStarter.execute(LifecycleStarter.java:128) >>> at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.doExecute(DefaultMaven.java:305) >>> at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.doExecute(DefaultMaven.java:192) >>> at org.apache.maven.DefaultMaven.execute(DefaultMaven.java:105) >>> at org.apache.maven.cli.MavenCli.execute(MavenCli.java:957) >>> at org.apache.maven.cli.MavenCli.doMain(MavenCli.java:289) >>> at org.apache.maven.cli.MavenCli.main(MavenCli.java:193) >>> at >>> java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native >>> Method) >>> at >>> java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62) >>> at >>> java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) >>> at java.base/java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:567) >>> at >>> org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.launchEnhanced(Launcher.java:282) >>> at >>> org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.launch(Launcher.java:225) >>> at >>> org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.mainWithExitCode(Launcher.java:406) >>> at >>> org.codehaus.plexus.classworlds.launcher.Launcher.main(Launcher.java:347) >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Brian >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org> >>> Sent: Friday, May 22, 2020 7:46 AM >>> To: Apache Royale Development <dev@royale.apache.org> >>> Subject: Re: About the cumbersome random compilation issue >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> if latest fixes as well fix this issue will be a great new for sure :) >>> since is random we just can see if it not happen again in the next 1-2 >>> weeks. >>> also maybe Brian can tell us about his experience too >>> >>> thanks >>> >>> >>> >>> El vie., 22 may. 2020 a las 13:27, Greg Dove (<greg.d...@gmail.com>) >>> escribió: >>> >>> > Carlos, please see if it still happens after the latest changes. >>> > I don't know if it will fix it or not, but it's worth a shot, based on >>> > the symptom that Brian Raymes described. >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 11:18 PM Carlos Rovira >>> > <carlosrov...@apache.org> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > > Hi Chris, >>> > > >>> > > maybe we're talking on different issues. The current problem is when >>> > > compiling or building a final application, so the compiler behaves >>> > > strangely sometimes doing things differently (for that reason I was >>> > > pointing to some thread throttle issue). If I understand you right, >>> > > I >>> > think >>> > > you're pointing to royale 3 repos building issues that from time to >>> > > time can hang. That use to be less frecuent than the problem I raise >>> here. >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > El jue., 21 may. 2020 a las 8:43, Christofer Dutz (< >>> > > christofer.d...@c-ware.de>) escribió: >>> > > >>> > > > Hi folks, >>> > > > >>> > > > I think it might be a resource leak between multiple module >>> > compilations. >>> > > > >>> > > > I never had the issue when running only one module but hat it >>> > > > quite regularly when doing the full build with all modules. So I >>> > > > guess >>> > probably >>> > > > the modules coming later in the build have a higher chance of >>> > > > running >>> > > into >>> > > > this problem. >>> > > > >>> > > > Things did improve when Greg fixed one of the leaks. >>> > > > But it hasn't gone away completely. >>> > > > >>> > > > Chris >>> > > > ________________________________ >>> > > > Von: Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org> >>> > > > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 20. Mai 2020 17:48 >>> > > > An: Apache Royale Development <dev@royale.apache.org> >>> > > > Betreff: Re: About the cumbersome random compilation issue >>> > > > >>> > > > Hi Greg, >>> > > > >>> > > > next time I'll get a fail compilation I'll store the results and >>> > comment. >>> > > > Other thing I'm wondering if is something only related to TDJ >>> > > > (jewel >>> > > apps) >>> > > > and that's not happening for Basic, Express, or MXRoyale >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > El mar., 19 may. 2020 a las 0:04, Greg Dove >>> > > > (<greg.d...@gmail.com>) >>> > > > escribió: >>> > > > >>> > > > > Carlos, it would be good to know if the issue you are seeing is >>> > > > > the >>> > > same >>> > > > > thing. >>> > > > > >>> > > > > I know you test mainly in release builds, so if you experience >>> > > > > that >>> > > issue >>> > > > > in a release build, can you confirm the issue is the same as >>> > > > > Brian >>> > > > reported >>> > > > > (missing 'prototype._bindings = [...' in the corresponding debug >>> > build? >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 9:55 AM Carlos Rovira < >>> > carlosrov...@apache.org >>> > > > >>> > > > > wrote: >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > Thanks Brian, >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > I forgot you already sent similar info some weeks ago. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > @Greg, you that know that code better, maybe there's some >>> > > > > > thread >>> > > issue >>> > > > > > here? For something that works sometime ok and others not, I >>> > > > > > think >>> > > that >>> > > > > > random behaviour seems a thread issue where there's no syncing. >>> > Have >>> > > > that >>> > > > > > sense? >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Thanks >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > El lun., 18 may. 2020 a las 20:17, Greg Dove >>> > > > > > (<greg.d...@gmail.com >>> > >) >>> > > > > > escribió: >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > That's interesting Brian, thanks for sharing that. >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > I have been working on a fix for inherited bindings, which >>> > > > > > > is >>> > > > something >>> > > > > > > that has never worked but which I needed to work (I now have >>> > > > > > > that >>> > > > > working >>> > > > > > > locally and expect to get that in today). I am not exactly >>> > > > > > > sure >>> > why >>> > > > > what >>> > > > > > > your saw was happening, but I have made another change >>> > > > > > > locally >>> > > which >>> > > > > > could >>> > > > > > > theoretically reduce the possibility of the type of thing >>> > > > > > > you >>> > > > described >>> > > > > > > from happening. I was going to revert it, as it is not >>> > > > > > > central to >>> > > the >>> > > > > > issue >>> > > > > > > for inherited bindings, but I will do more extensive testing >>> > > > > > > with >>> > > it >>> > > > > > > included and see if it is ok to leave in. >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 5:35 AM Brian Raymes < >>> > > > brian.ray...@teotech.com >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > wrote: >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > I cannot speak for js-release, but it happens to me with >>> > js-debug >>> > > > in >>> > > > > > what >>> > > > > > > > seems like 1 in every 10 builds. Possibly more often. >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > I've made copies a couple times to compare the output. >>> > > > > > > > Each >>> > time, >>> > > > it >>> > > > > > > > appears that some "prototype._bindings" are missing. Here >>> > > > > > > > is >>> > > > example >>> > > > > > > > related to TourDeJewel: >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > In NavigationGroupExampleItemRenderer.js, the following is >>> > > missing >>> > > > > > > > entirely in a bad build: >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > /** >>> > > > > > > > * @export >>> > > > > > > > */ >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > itemRenderers.NavigationGroupExampleItemRenderer.prototype._bindin >>> > > > gs >>> > > > > = >>> > > > > > [ >>> > > > > > > > // >>> > > > > > > > // contents removed for brevity >>> > > > > > > > // >>> > > > > > > > ]; >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Several of these "xxxxx.prototype._bindings" sections were >>> > > missing >>> > > > > from >>> > > > > > > > the generated JavaScript. >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Hope this helps. >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Brian >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- >>> > > > > > > > From: Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> >>> > > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2020 8:26 AM >>> > > > > > > > To: dev@royale.apache.org >>> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: About the cumbersome random compilation issue >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > BTW, is this in js-debug or js-release? >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > On 5/17/20, 8:20 AM, "Alex Harui" >>> > > > > > > > <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> >>> > > > wrote: >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Save a good build. When you think you have a bad >>> > > > > > > > build, >>> > > compare >>> > > > > the >>> > > > > > > > output. >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > On 5/17/20, 3:46 AM, "Carlos Rovira" < >>> > > carlosrov...@apache.org> >>> > > > > > > wrote: >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Hi, >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > I want to open a thread about how to solve the >>> > > > > > > > weird >>> > > random >>> > > > > > > > compilation >>> > > > > > > > issue where, from time to time, renderers has no >>> > content. >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Since is random, this is hard to find, but seems >>> > > > > > > > the >>> > > > problem >>> > > > > is >>> > > > > > > > each time >>> > > > > > > > more easy to get. >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > I suffer in compling TDJ from time to time. And >>> > > > > > > > the >>> > > result >>> > > > is >>> > > > > > > that >>> > > > > > > > some >>> > > > > > > > times all compiles ok, and other times I get some >>> > > Navigator >>> > > > > > > > itemrenders >>> > > > > > > > without content (use to be per Navigator >>> > > > > > > > component, so >>> > > all >>> > > > > > > renders >>> > > > > > > > in a >>> > > > > > > > control are affected), other times are TabBar >>> > > > > > > > items, >>> > > other >>> > > > > > times >>> > > > > > > > are list >>> > > > > > > > item renders inside List playground, and so on. >>> > > > > > > > Some >>> > > times >>> > > > > the >>> > > > > > > > problem >>> > > > > > > > affects many of the before mentioned controls, and >>> > other >>> > > > > times >>> > > > > > > are >>> > > > > > > > less of >>> > > > > > > > them. >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > I think as TDJ grows, the problem increases, and I >>> > > > > > > > end >>> > > > > > compiling >>> > > > > > > > the same >>> > > > > > > > 2-3 consecutive times until I get the compilation >>> > right. >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > For me this problem is one requirement to reach >>> > > > > > > > 1.0, >>> > > since >>> > > > it >>> > > > > > > > reveals a >>> > > > > > > > cumbersome issue, that seems to increase with size >>> > > > > > > > of >>> > the >>> > > > > > source >>> > > > > > > > code >>> > > > > > > > involved. >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > I want to ask here if others are finding this >>> > > > > > > > issue too >>> > > in >>> > > > > > their >>> > > > > > > > projects, >>> > > > > > > > examples, etc.. >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > As well what could be the problem. Any theory? >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > The problem should be in a compilation task that >>> > involve >>> > > > > > > > components that >>> > > > > > > > uses renderers inside. A based renderer control >>> > > > > > > > can >>> > > compile >>> > > > > ok, >>> > > > > > > > but the >>> > > > > > > > next one not, and the next could be right >>> > > > > > > > again...it's >>> > > all >>> > > > > > > random. >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > It seems a java thread issue where we need to sync >>> > better >>> > > > to >>> > > > > > > > endure things >>> > > > > > > > are build properly. >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Any idea or thing we could try to solve this >>> problem? >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Thanks >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > -- >>> > > > > > > > Carlos Rovira >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout >>> > .me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C091b10b063f >>> > 747ec4b8608d7fa75da82%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637 >>> > 253256395538387&sdata=xO5EaBe5pz6F0%2BICaCefem2z8siG4%2FaZqw6Kqpo0 >>> > VBg%3D&reserved=0 >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > -- >>> > > > > > Carlos Rovira >>> > > > > > http://about.me/carlosrovira >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > -- >>> > > > Carlos Rovira >>> > > > http://about.me/carlosrovira >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > -- >>> > > Carlos Rovira >>> > > http://about.me/carlosrovira >>> > > >>> > >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Carlos Rovira >>> http://about.me/carlosrovira >>> >>
