I'm not an expert on asconfic, but I remember I solved it maintaining
"royale" as config and adding this:
"library-path": [
"${royalelib}/js/libs/MXRoyaleJS.swc"
],
"js-library-path": [
"${royalelib}/js/libs/MXRoyaleJS.swc"
],
I think maybe just the second was enough...
We hopefully will separate MX in libraries and will create a "jewel" config
that adds RPC and maybe others that could be needed.
Also remember to remove mx css adding this to additional compiler options:
-compiler.exclude-defaults-css-files=MXRoyale-${royale.framework.version}-js.swc:defaults.css;
El vie., 10 jul. 2020 a las 11:23, Hugo Ferreira (<[email protected]>)
escribió:
> Hello,
>
> That's a good idea, because I want to avoid MX UI as much as possible,
> since I decided for Royale, so Royale it is.
> However I don't see so many problems for non-UI stuff.
> My issue is that to work with MX, I saw that I need to change my
> asconfig.json from "config": "royale" to "config": "flex" (ps: I'm using
> Visual Studio Code) and then I got all sort of namespace conflicts between
> MX and Royale.For what you said, I believe that's a better way to mix MX
> and Royale without changing so dramatically config file.
>
> Carlos Rovira <[email protected]> escreveu no dia sexta, 10/07/2020
> à(s) 09:32:
>
> > Hi Hugo,
> > you can use MXRoyale in "Royale only" (i.e: jewel) apps.
> > You must to be careful, but code like RPC classes, validators, and
> probably
> > BindingUtils can be used.
> > I think while you don't use "visual" things, that should be ok. It maybe
> > would require you to try it, but at least RPC classes are working for
> many
> > others and I used as well some validators time ago.
> >
> > El vie., 10 jul. 2020 a las 0:39, Hugo Ferreira (<[email protected]
> >)
> > escribió:
> >
> > > OK.
> > > I'm using Royale only, so BindingUtils (mx version) is not available in
> > my
> > > case.
> > > I will try to workaround in a different way (for sure I have to write
> > more
> > > code) but yes, BindingUtils is a short way in a single line to do the
> > > things (it will be a missing feature).
> > >
> > > Greg Dove <[email protected]> escreveu no dia quinta, 9/07/2020 à(s)
> > > 23:34:
> > >
> > > > When I originally wrote that, it was not intended to be used directly
> > in
> > > > code, it was intended to support the metadata-driven injected
> bindings,
> > > > specifically with Crux. It is quite specific for Crux.
> > > > It does need BindableChainInfo instances in that last argument
> instead
> > of
> > > > strings. Perhaps the code can be adapted to be more useful other than
> > > with
> > > > Crux, but would need some time and effort focused on that.
> > > > Is it not viable to use injection in your case?
> > > >
> > > > Since I worked on that, I did also do some work in the mx.binding
> > inside
> > > > MXRoyale. Maybe the BindingUtils in there is more like what you want?
> > (It
> > > > is closer to the original Flex)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 10:02 AM Hugo Ferreira <
> [email protected]
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The following line of code, compiles without any issue:
> > > > > BindingUtils.bindProperty(header, "minimized", content,
> ["visible"]);
> > > > >
> > > > > However at runtime, I got the following error on Google Chrome
> > Console:
> > > > > Uncaught TypeError: Error #1034: Type Coercion failed: cannot
> convert
> > > > > visible to org.apache.royale.crux.binding.BindableChainInfo
> > > > > at Function.org.apache.royale.utils.Language.as
> > (Language.js:115)
> > > > > at
> > > Function.org.apache.royale.crux.binding.BindingUtils.bindProperty
> > > > > (BindingUtils.js:73)
> > > > > at
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> pt.solidsoft.gc.view.login.Login.pt.solidsoft.framework.form.Form.addElement
> > > > > (Form.mxml:32)
> > > > > at
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> Function.org.apache.royale.utils.MXMLDataInterpreter.initializeStrandBasedObject
> > > > > (MXMLDataInterpreter.js:241)
> > > > > at
> > > > >
> > Function.org.apache.royale.utils.MXMLDataInterpreter.generateMXMLArray
> > > > > (MXMLDataInterpreter.js:127)
> > > > > at
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> Function.org.apache.royale.utils.MXMLDataInterpreter.generateMXMLInstances
> > > > > (MXMLDataInterpreter.js:271)
> > > > > at
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> pt.solidsoft.gc.view.login.Login.org.apache.royale.jewel.Container.addedToParent
> > > > > (Container.js:76)
> > > > > at
> > > > >
> org.apache.royale.html.Group.org.apache.royale.core.UIBase.addElement
> > > > > (UIBase.js:405)
> > > > > at
> > > > >
> > >
> org.apache.royale.html.Group.org.apache.royale.core.GroupBase.addElement
> > > > > (GroupBase.js:165)
> > > > > at
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> Function.org.apache.royale.utils.MXMLDataInterpreter.initializeStrandBasedObject
> > > > > (MXMLDataInterpreter.js:241)
> > > > >
> > > > > An explanation:
> > > > > header is the source instance of a component
> > > > > minimized is the public Bindable property that I'm listening
> > > > > content is the target instance of a component
> > > > > visible is the visibility of the target that I want to depend on
> the
> > > > > minimized property
> > > > >
> > > > > Is this a bug that I should insert on github issues or I'm doing
> > > > something
> > > > > wrong ?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> > http://about.me/carlosrovira
> >
>
--
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira
