Interesting. In Flex, aren't all setters defined as functions that don't
return anything? I wonder if more complex chained assignments are allowed:
foo = 1 + bar = 10;
If not (or maybe even if it does work), then maybe it is best to deal with this
as an assignment pattern and not bother to generate code that returns a value
which I suspect would be wasteful 99% of the time it isn't used in a chain
assignment.
I think in the AS VM, the value 10 is pushed on the stack and left on the stack
after the assignment so it can be assigned to the next thing in the chain.
HTH,
-Alex
On 2/28/22, 10:38 AM, "GitBox" <g...@apache.org> wrote:
joshtynjala commented on issue #210:
URL:
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Froyale-compiler%2Fissues%2F210%23issuecomment-1054550835&data=04%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C585f7c9bbf31412ddc4e08d9fae993a6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637816703377905729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=%2FS%2FUXUvEuIUtGA3cOABVjsvn2%2FQ3RAFXdjRDQRrV1uc%3D&reserved=0
I suspect this applies to any getter/setter property, and not only ones
accessed using `super`.
This seems to be how the JS code is generated:
```js
this.com_example_MyClass_something =
com.example.MyClass.superClass_.set__mySetter.apply(this, [ value] );
```
It fails because the setter doesn't return anything. So I think that
`undefined` would be assigned to `something`, instead of the value.
The generated JS should probably be something like this instead:
```js
com.example.MyClass.superClass_.set__mySetter.apply(this, [ value] )
this.com_example_MyClass_something =
com.example.MyClass.superClass_.get__mySetter.apply(this);
```
However, I think that will be tricky to generate because I'm pretty sure
that the emitter writes multiple assignments without looking ahead, and
`this.com_example_MyClass_something` will already be be emitted before we even
detect that there's a setter involved.
It might not look pretty, but I think that we can use the [comma
operator](https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdeveloper.mozilla.org%2Fen-US%2Fdocs%2FWeb%2FJavaScript%2FReference%2FOperators%2FComma_Operator&data=04%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C585f7c9bbf31412ddc4e08d9fae993a6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637816703377905729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=0BqmirUJ8UplBYGscHHaz5Laqp4fWW9VpNJgHGQzgkE%3D&reserved=0)
to make this work. Probably safest with parentheses around the full expression.
```js
this.com_example_MyClass_something =
(com.example.MyClass.superClass_.set__mySetter.apply(this, [ value]),
com.example.MyClass.superClass_.get__mySetter.apply(this));
```
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@royale.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
