Wow. I don't think it is supposed to do that. Please create a simple test case and create a JIRA issue.
-Alex On 12/3/13 5:53 PM, "David Coleman" <david_coleman_...@hotmail.com> wrote: >For instance i have an app in flash builder with a boat load of modules > >I set one of these modules to be optimized for MyApp.mxml > >the embedded images in MyOptimizedModule end up in MyApp.mxml. > >The good thing is that MyApp and MyOptimizedModule can now be statically >linked w/o doubling its size. the bad thing is that now I have defeated >the purpose of putting my assets in the module. > >can I optimize a module for MyApp without all of its embedded assets >ending up in the optimization target? > >It is my understanding that optimizing a module for a specific >application ends up removing all embedded assets from the module and >storing them in the application. > >If you want i can reproduce this in a few example projects and post it up >on my git. > >> From: aha...@adobe.com >> To: dev@flex.apache.org >> Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 17:19:06 -0800 >> Subject: Re: SharedLibrary not works with SDK 4.11 >> >> I don't understand the part about embedded assets. Can you provide more >> details? The -externs option should let you keep any class out of any >>SWF. >> >> You can create a shared code module or pack other classes needed by >> modules onto extra frames of the main SWF. >> >> -Alex >> >> On 12/3/13 4:05 PM, "David Coleman" <david_coleman_...@hotmail.com> >>wrote: >> >> >I do agree with your numbers, (how could I not - they are spot on). >>The >> >primary issue is that WE host the rsl or the static link difference. >>and >> >the static link difference affects the size of our modules too. So >>it's >> >100% more for modules, and since we have 7.8 MB of modules (18 >>different >> >popups each with animations/hd graphics etc), then we are talking about >> >static linking costing a lot more. >> > >> >If i can customize an RSL to service all 18 modules and the main app >>and >> >only have to distribute one file, that is even better for a new user >>than >> >the Adobe RSL's... ok we have to pay for the CDN costs... but it's less >> >than an extra 7.8 MB of static links for all our modules. >> > >> >Harbs pointed out the exact reason RSL is so critical to our use case. >> >Modules are doubled. >> > >> >Now, if the modules could only statically link what is lacking in the >> >static links of the main application, with out optimizing them and >> >pushing all the embedded assets to the main application... kinda like a >> >"half-optimized" module, then static link could really work for us. >>but >> >as long as an optimized module will push all the assets into the main >> >app, i can't optimize them to share the static links. so they need >>their >> >own static links... >> > >> >Maybe this is something that can work! >> > >> >how can i optimize a module to share the static links of the main app >> >without pushing all the embedded assets in the module to the main app? >> >does mxmlc include a metatag to exclude a class (embedded asset) from >> >module optimization? so it would stay in the module while i optimize >>it >> >for the main app, and then only have to statically link the few bits >>and >> >pieces that are lacking in each. >> > >> >> From: aha...@adobe.com >> >> To: dev@flex.apache.org >> >> Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 15:51:44 -0800 >> >> Subject: Re: SharedLibrary not works with SDK 4.11 >> >> >> >> OK, so let me make sure I understand: >> >> >> >> For first time users, they have to download 3MB of Assets and the >>600K >> >>SWF >> >> and hopefully not the 1.4MB's of framework RSLs. >> >> For returning users, 3MB Assets and 600K SWF is hopefully in the >>browser >> >> cache. >> >> >> >> If you switch to Apache Flex: >> >> First-time users will have to download either >> >> 1) 3MB of Assets, 600K of SWF and 1.4MB of RSLs from your CDN. >> >> 2) 3MB of Assets and 1.2MB of SWF if you statically link. >> >> >> >> So, Apache Flex statically linked is another 600K and represents an >> >> additional 12% in download time. >> >> >> >> I don't know what the RSL penetration is of Flex 4.5.1, but every day >> >> folks are buying new computers and there are fewer and fewer Flex >>4.5.1 >> >> apps out there in the world so the probability your first-time >>customers >> >> will have those RSLs is diminishing. Over time, more and more of >>your >> >> customers will be downloading the 1.4MB of framework RSLs as well, >>and >> >>the >> >> statically linked solution will be the smaller download. >> >> >> >> Have you used ItDepends or a similar link-report analyzer to see how >> >>much >> >> of that 600K is Greensock, Tweener and other stuff? >> >> >> >> -Alex >> >> >> >> On 12/3/13 3:11 PM, "David Coleman" <david_coleman_...@hotmail.com> >> >>wrote: >> >> >> >> >Upon re-reading this I realize that I didn't understand your >>question. >> >> > >> >> >What it will save us is that in the majority of instances, we will >> >> >benefit from the cached RSL. >> >> > >> >> >And we will be able to still push smaller files so that NEW users do >> >>not >> >> >see a jump in the time that it takes to open the app. >> >> > >> >> >Competition is high in this genre of games, and being the fastest to >> >>load >> >> >is important. We won "Best social Casino Product of 2013" this >>year. >> >> >Maybe if we were not the fastest to load we might have still won. >> >>Maybe >> >> >not. But we are. And I would hazard the guess that it played a >>role. >> >> >Many ppl already HAVE the RSL's cached on their machines. I have to >> >> >offset that benefit by minimizing as much as possible the hit that >>any >> >> >Apache based solution would incur. >> >> > >> >> >As with any social game the first impression is the most important >>one. >> >> >Especially with those who are disposed to spend real money. I know >> >>that >> >> >TECHNICALLY there are many reasons to just link it statically and >> >>forget >> >> >about it. But from a business perspective, every shred of speed >>that >> >>we >> >> >can statistically extract from the app is worth it. >> >> > >> >> >I can't justify moving all the framework RSL's to our CDN and >>storing >> >> >them in browser only cache instead of perpetual flash player >>storage. >> >> >That's why I asked about local storage hacks. I CAN justify >>putting a >> >> >SINGLE file on our CDN, if it means greater stability (ie: new SDK) >>and >> >> >downloading a smaller amount of bytes than the 4.5.1 RSL's. a few >> >>bytes >> >> >are big money when you are distributing them to a million ppl. >> >> > >> >> >Unfortunately, that's the reality of the business side of a social >> >>app. :( >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> From: david_coleman_...@hotmail.com >> >> >> To: dev@flex.apache.org >> >> >> Subject: RE: SharedLibrary not works with SDK 4.11 >> >> >> Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 19:56:13 -0300 >> >> >> >> >> >> It saves us a great deal of time and resources when we have to >> >>release >> >> >>new art. >> >> >> >> >> >> We can break cache on the art asset module and not have to run a >>full >> >> >>QA regression on the main app. This gives us the flexibility as a >> >> >>company to deliver constantly changing content to our users w/o >> >>forcing >> >> >>them to download every file again, or dedicating our time and >> >>resources >> >> >>to QA of the application when we only want to change a single >>image in >> >> >>the game list. >> >> >> >> >> >> It is a logistical and political need as much as it is a technical >> >> >>decision to approach it this way. >> >> >> >> >> >> > From: aha...@adobe.com >> >> >> > To: dev@flex.apache.org >> >> >> > Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:43:33 -0800 >> >> >> > Subject: Re: SharedLibrary not works with SDK 4.11 >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > On 12/3/13 2:38 PM, "David Coleman" >><david_coleman_...@hotmail.com> >> >> >>wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >Actually Alex, what is the biggest culprit in our file is >> >>Greensock, >> >> >>and >> >> >> > >after that, a whole mess of engine logic needed to handle the >> >> >>interface >> >> >> > >with the games. Also some of our legacy animations use >>Tweener, >> >>so >> >> >>for >> >> >> > >now I'm cursed with having to include BOTH libs in the main >>app. >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >I also think that 500K is too much and like I said, each >>version I >> >> >> > >whittle it down a little more. >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >I've often thought of loading the engine container as a module >>to >> >> >>remove >> >> >> > >another 100K or so from the main app. >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >How would i create a custom RSL? Can I automate it via ant to >> >> >>generate >> >> >> > >it via the link-reports? I'd like to keep one RSL for ALL >>files, >> >> >>app, >> >> >> > >and modules to increase cache hits, and not hit a different >>file >> >>each >> >> >> > >time. >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >I'm really curious to experiment with this. It's ok if the >> >>browser >> >> >>cache >> >> >> > >expires, that's beyond my control, but 99% of the time it will >>be >> >>a >> >> >> > >benefit - I'm ok with those numbers. >> >> >> > I asked this in the other reply, but how will that save you >>over a >> >> >>single >> >> >> > monolithic SWF? If you're not in the cache, then instead of >> >>loading >> >> >>two >> >> >> > things, one of which may contain classes you don't need until >> >>later, >> >> >>you >> >> >> > only load what you need when you need it. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > -Alex >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >
