I was playing around with it, trying to demonstrate the advantages of typed objects, expecting Object to mess up function calls. The demo glitch was that GCC was fine with a looser version.
From: Harbs<mailto:harbs.li...@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 9, 2021 2:13 PM To: dev@royale.apache.org<mailto:dev@royale.apache.org> Subject: Re: Why Does GCC Not Rename This? Why is it Object and not “Editor”? private var editor:Editor; > On Nov 9, 2021, at 2:03 PM, Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Oh. I misread what you wrote. I thought you were asking about “theme”. > > -js-dynamic-access-unknown-members=true is probably effecting that. What > compiler option is being used? > >> On Nov 9, 2021, at 1:59 PM, Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> @nocollapse is what prevents renaming. >> >> Why it’s writing @nocollapse is another question... >> >>> On Nov 9, 2021, at 1:36 PM, Yishay Weiss <yishayj...@hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> An application that uses this class [1] minifies to this [2]. In >>> >>> org.apache.royale.ace.ACEEditor.prototype.set__theme = function(value) { >>> this.org_apache_royale_ace_ACEEditor__theme = value; >>> var /** @type {Object} */ obj = this.editor; >>> obj.setTheme(value); >>> }; >>> >>> I expected the closure compiler to rename setTheme(), but instead it >>> retained it. How did it know to do that? Is it because it’s an Object type? >>> >>> >>> [1] Apache Paste Bucket<https://paste.apache.org/gg0dy> >>> [2] Apache Paste Bucket<https://paste.apache.org/4c5f0> >> >
