I put your app in the debugger and get the same exception. And selecting from the dropdownlist doesn't change anything.
On 3/30/13 8:13 AM, "Erik de Bruin" <e...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote: > Maybe I'm doing something wrong... the example on my p.a.o works for you? > > http://people.apache.org/~erikdebruin/flexjs/ > > Maybe try Chrome? > > EdB > > > > On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 4:01 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: >> I'm not seeing anything like that in the HTML wrapper. Safari is definitely >> throwing on exception on "new Event". Any idea what I'm doing wrong? >> >> >> On 3/30/13 7:54 AM, "Erik de Bruin" <e...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote: >> >>> I left out FlexGlobals on purpose, I plan to bring the Google Closure >>> way of dealing with events to FlexJS. The GC way is not dependent on >>> DOM based events and fits very snugly with the way Flex handles >>> events. >>> >>> In the mean time I've a method in the "main" HTML that is called Event >>> and that passes the event through to FlexGlobals for now. >>> >>> EdB >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: >>>> Hi Erik, >>>> >>>> I finally got time to try to switch over to FalconJX. It produces js files >>>> and the app shows up, but the console shows an exception and the >>>> interactivity of the application is mostly broken because the generated js >>>> code has snippets like this: >>>> >>>> models.MyModel.prototype.set_labelText = function(value) { >>>> var self = this; >>>> if (value != self._labelText) { >>>> self._labelText = value; >>>> self.dispatchEvent(new Event("labelTextChanged")); >>>> } >>>> }; >>>> >>>> In the FalconJS output, we are calling FlexGlobals.newObject because Event >>>> is a special class in the browser that can't be instantiated via "new" and >>>> FlexJS is using these DOM Events. >>>> >>>> Did I miss a flag, or can I go about trying to intercept these calls and >>>> have them call FlexGlobals.newObject instead? >>>> >>>> -Alex >>>> >>>> >>>> On 3/29/13 11:58 AM, "Erik de Bruin" <e...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Ok, we're back in business! I think this time I have been working with >>>>> the right version of FlexJS (the one with the timer and the drop down >>>>> list?) and it looks to work as advertised: >>>>> >>>>> http://people.apache.org/~erikdebruin/flexjs/ >>>>> >>>>> Time to get packing for the long flight ;-) >>>>> >>>>> EdB >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Erik de Bruin <e...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote: >>>>>> Ah, and there's plenty left for you to "learn" from :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> EdB >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 2:30 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: >>>>>>> No worries. Might be a good way for me to learn how it works by getting >>>>>>> it >>>>>>> to work. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 3/29/13 12:31 AM, "Erik de Bruin" <e...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Uh oh... Turns out I was testing against an outdated ASJS lib >>>>>>>> (pre-fb614905ac), so FalconJx DOESN'T WORK against the current >>>>>>>> iteration of FlexJS. Sorry about that. I will work on that today, but >>>>>>>> I don't have a lot of time, so it might be a while before I can catch >>>>>>>> up, due to next week's travel to the land of golden opportunity. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> EdB >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 5:24 PM, Erik de Bruin <e...@ixsoftware.nl> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> And another update (things are going much better than I expected): >>>>>>>>> FalconJx can now emit a fully functional version of the >>>>>>>>> FlexJSTest_again demo application. You can see it in action here >>>>>>>>> (provided you use Chrome or Firefox, I just noticed): >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~erikdebruin/flexjs/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Onwards and upwards ;-) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> EdB >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 9:58 PM, Erik de Bruin <e...@ixsoftware.nl> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> I'd have to look into it for specifics, but of the top of my head it >>>>>>>>>> seems that this most depends on the implementation in the FlexJS JS >>>>>>>>>> framework. Emitting the strings required by that framework should >>>>>>>>>> really be easy enough. If needed we can "look forward" into AST to >>>>>>>>>> look for binding information. I do this in several other places >>>>>>>>>> already. Even the binding expressions shouldn't be too much of a >>>>>>>>>> problem, again depending on how this will be handled by the JS >>>>>>>>>> framework. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> EdB >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> [Bindable] results in extra codegen. Binding expressions with {} is >>>>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>>>> whole >>>>>>>>>>> other ball of work. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I think in FalconJX you might have to modify the node tree in >>>>>>>>>>> several >>>>>>>>>>> places >>>>>>>>>>> when you hit a [Bindable] node. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> It isn't working correctly in FalconJS either, but my "customer" >>>>>>>>>>> needs >>>>>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>>>> so >>>>>>>>>>> I'm hacking a fix. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/13 1:28 PM, "Erik de Bruin" <e...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> No, not yet. How is this set up in FlexJS? I'm sure I can read >>>>>>>>>>>> Metadata >>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>> Databinding information, so I guess it depends on the requirements >>>>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>> emitted JS if I can easily implement this ;-) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> EdB >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 27, 2013, Alex Harui wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Does FalconJX handle [Bindable]? My "customer" is using it. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/13 11:56 AM, "Michael Schmalle" <apa...@teotigraphix.com> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Quoting Erik de Bruin <e...@ixsoftware.nl>: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Another one popped into my head just now: I have a gut feeling >>>>>>>>>>>> there >>>>>>>>>>>> is a bit of circular logic going on in the whole 'backend', >>>>>>>>>>>> 'blockwalker' and 'emitter' construct. More specifically in the way >>>>>>>>>>>> the references to them are passed around as arguments in the >>>>>>>>>>>> constructors for the various classes. But I can't wrap around it >>>>>>>>>>>> well >>>>>>>>>>>> enough to figure out whether it's wrong and if so, what might be >>>>>>>>>>>> done >>>>>>>>>>>> about it. Don't get me wrong, it works well, it's just that it >>>>>>>>>>>> somehow >>>>>>>>>>>> isn't "elegant". And that's in no way a comment on the >>>>>>>>>>>> effectiveness >>>>>>>>>>>> or quality of your code, just something I thought I'd share and see >>>>>>>>>>>> what you think. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Actually I think it works fine. The problem you are facing is with >>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>> MXML emitter I am sure. This adds complexity to what you are trying >>>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>> accomplish and it is circular from the perspective of using AS >>>>>>>>>>>> within >>>>>>>>>>>> MXML. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> There is a buffer writer(output stream), a writer, a visitor and >>>>>>>>>>>> emitter. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Each one takes a dependency of its parent. Trust me, if there is a >>>>>>>>>>>> child that knows about its parent I am blind. Like I said, the >>>>>>>>>>>> block >>>>>>>>>>>> walker is a visitor and the emitter is a visitor. You cannot escape >>>>>>>>>>>> the fact there is recursion. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> If you can think of a more elegant way to set it up, by all means >>>>>>>>>>>> write a prototype. Remember, I wrote this with an atom bomb under >>>>>>>>>>>> me >>>>>>>>>>>> and lighting in the sky, there may be parts that could be >>>>>>>>>>>> logicalized. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I have another full compiler in Randori that I am going to use as a >>>>>>>>>>>> proof of concept with compiler plugins and my ASDoc compiler I >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>> So I guess we both can experiment, we can agree to leave the core >>>>>>>>>>>> alone for the time being. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> EdB >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 7:41 PM, Erik de Bruin <e...@ixsoftware.nl> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Mike, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Just kidding ;-) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I'm really happy with FalconJx, once you get to know it it's a >>>>>>>>>>>> pleasure to work with. I hope my last commits didn't give you any >>>>>>>>>>>> additional work in your other projects? I did my best to leave all >>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>> APIs alone. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> There are plenty of TODOs in the code, and I would also like to >>>>>>>>>>>> suggest some kind of code review or something (I'm not used to >>>>>>>>>>>> working >>>>>>>>>>>> in groups, but that seems like a nice thing to do), since I've been >>>>>>>>>>>> piling on stuff. I did my best to keep everything clean and in line >>>>>>>>>>>> with the spirit of the rest of the code, but there are some areas >>>>>>>>>>>> where I'd like to have a second opinion. Like with the code that is >>>>>>>>>>>> copied between the DOC and JS emitters, seems there might be room >>>>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>>>> improvement there. Also of note is the way I've implemented the AS >>>>>>>>>>>> emitting within the MXML emitter, not really sure if I did the >>>>>>>>>>>> right >>>>>>>>>>>> thing there. And finally (not really, but this is all I can think >>>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>> for now, after the marathon hacking I did today) there is the whole >>>>>>>>>>>> "programming to interfaces, not implementations" part that we >>>>>>>>>>>> nearly >>>>>>>>>>>> adhere to, but not quite, we might have another look at that as >>>>>>>>>>>> well. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> EdB >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 7:33 PM, Michael Schmalle >>>>>>>>>>>> <apa...@teotigraphix.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> No thats not what I meant. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I am saying with the Randori project compiler, I have not had to >>>>>>>>>>>> touch the >>>>>>>>>>>> core framework for weeks and it is compiling 1000's of lines of >>>>>>>>>>>> code. >>>>>>>>>>>> And >>>>>>>>>>>> application code now. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> What I meant to say was, the design keeps people in the correct >>>>>>>>>>>> spaces. :) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Note; I AM SURE there are as3 bugs coming, its just nice not >>>>>>>>>>>> having to chase >>>>>>>>>>>> them right now. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>>>>>>> Alex Harui >>>>>>>>>>>> Flex SDK Team >>>>>>>>>>>> Adobe Systems, Inc. >>>>>>>>>>>> http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Ix Multimedia Software >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Jan Luykenstraat 27 >>>>>>>>> 3521 VB Utrecht >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> T. 06-51952295 >>>>>>>>> I. www.ixsoftware.nl >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Alex Harui >>>> Flex SDK Team >>>> Adobe Systems, Inc. >>>> http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui >>>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> 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 -- Alex Harui Flex SDK Team Adobe Systems, Inc. http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
