I was talking about changes to the JS output, not the AS input. There is some obsolete stuff in the Goog JSDoc annotation; the use of goog.base() instead of [functionname].call(); maybe use goog.bind() and I'm not at all sure what more. We'll need to discuss the use of HTML5 "object" methods like "defineProperty", or another alternative to emitting all property accessors as method calls. But rest assured, I'll take care not to optimise prematurely ;-)
EdB On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > What would the change to FlexJS look like? Are you assuming that the > browser has getter/setter support or is there a flag for that? > > If it is trivial I can tweak FalconJS to use the right pattern and then > adjust FlexJS for you. > > > On 3/26/13 3:08 AM, "Erik de Bruin" <e...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote: > >> I wasn't being specific enough... I should have said: support for >> cross-compiling all AS features to FlexJS specific output. This means >> basically getting the 'goog' emission complete (nearly there) and >> fixing the FlexJS framework to be compatible with 'goog' output (or >> introducing a FlexJS emitter, which I'll probably do to make the >> transition of FlexJS to FalconJx a bit smoother). >> >> EdB >> >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Michael Schmalle >> <apa...@teotigraphix.com> wrote: >>> >>> Quoting Erik de Bruin <e...@ixsoftware.nl>: >>> >>>>> Erik thinks he can do all of this in VanillaJS. I still think it will >>>>> take >>>>> him too long to get to a minimal viable product and VanillaJS will have a >>>>> huge minimal download and worry that folks are waiting for him instead of >>>>> jumping in on FlexJS hoping he can provide the magic bullet. >>>> >>>> >>>> Well, you hit the nail on the head there. While people seem to like >>>> VanillaSDK as a viable alternative to FlexJS (probably because they >>>> wouldn't have to relearn their "Flex" skills to get access to JS as an >>>> alternative platform), nobody has stepped up to help out, they're all >>>> "waiting" for me. I can't (and won't) do it all on my own, especially >>>> not since I have limited time and want to use the time I have to get >>>> FlexJS into FalconJx and give FalconJx full support for all aspects of >>>> AS/MXML. So, at least for the foreseeable future, I won't be >>>> developing VanillaSDK, instead I'll be putting my energy into making >>>> FlexJS work and work well. >>> >>> >>>> and give FalconJx full support for all aspects of >>>> AS/MXML. >>> >>> >>> Full support of MXML you are doing but what are the problems with support of >>> AS? If there are outstanding issues with AS, I can do them. So far with >>> Randori, We have some large applications and the frameworks being cross >>> compiled with no bugs. >>> >>> This is also why, I haven't been working on the core much since it's stable >>> for the moment. >>> >>> Let me know. >>> >>> Mike >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> EdB >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Ix Multimedia Software >>>> >>>> Jan Luykenstraat 27 >>>> 3521 VB Utrecht >>>> >>>> T. 06-51952295 >>>> I. www.ixsoftware.nl >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Michael Schmalle - Teoti Graphix, LLC >>> http://www.teotigraphix.com >>> http://blog.teotigraphix.com >>> >> >> > > -- > Alex Harui > Flex SDK Team > Adobe Systems, Inc. > http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui > -- Ix Multimedia Software Jan Luykenstraat 27 3521 VB Utrecht T. 06-51952295 I. www.ixsoftware.nl
