Gorgon, sorry as well, I didn't mean FB but FP, I use to write faster than I
think :P
Frédéric THOMAS
> From: webdoubl...@hotmail.com
> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 06:31:26 +0100
>
> @Om, sorry, I misreading but yes, singleton means also some static methods
> and I tried it having some trouble with but don't think it will be for a long
> time.
>
> Frédéric THOMAS
>
> > From: webdoubl...@hotmail.com
> > To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> > Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 06:22:50 +0100
> >
> > @Om, Didn't mentioned it because I guess the implementation for "new" and
> > the relative checks are almost the same than for the extends and now I
> > understand better FP, even though I mentioned method overloading
> > implementation, actually, I guess it could be even done without but would
> > be cleaner with, I'm anyway close to and will demonstrate the extends soon.
> > I guess I did the hardest part in compiling a lib and be able to have some
> > NS informations passed thru the ABC without FP complaining and keeping the
> > original implementation intention in not modifying the CMImplicit NS to not
> > make FB complaining as mentioned in the method comments).
> >
> > @Gordon, from what I've seen at the moment, I guess you're right, the
> > constructor is just a function, FB doesn't enforce NS, everything is done
> > at compile time, the only barrier was the CMImplicitNS, I kept it and
> > passed other NS info thru the abc, you will see the code relatively soon, I
> > guess next weekend (my time on it is very limited) and I would like you to
> > review it if you don't mind, and for the reflection maybe there will be
> > some tricks but as I do it at the moment, even the legacy compiler raise a
> > verify error when I try to instantiate a class with a private ctor.
> >
> >
> > Frédéric THOMAS
> >
> > > Subject: Re: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> > > From: gsmit...@hotmail.com
> > > Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2014 19:35:42 -0700
> > > To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > >
> > > In general the ActionScript Virtual Machine enforces access modifiers (so
> > > that, for example, something marked private is truly inaccessible by any
> > > means outside the class) but I don't think the AVM enforces non-public
> > > constructors. I'm guessing that a constructor in the ABC is public
> > > regardless of what the source code says, which would mean that the
> > > constructor could be invoked by any code via reflection. If this is the
> > > case, I'm not convinced we should pretend that constructors can be
> > > non-public.
> > >
> > > - Gordon
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPad
> > >
> > > > On Oct 4, 2014, at 4:14 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala"
> > > > <bigosma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> On Oct 4, 2014 12:55 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <webdoubl...@hotmail.com>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Hi,
> > > >>
> > > >> I started to check if it was possible to have private and protected
> > > > constructor in Falcon and I have to admit it was tricky especially
> > > > because
> > > > I never seen a compiler from inside before but it is apparently
> > > > possible,
> > > > I've been able to compile successfully:
> > > >> package myLib {
> > > >> public class CTORTest {
> > > >> private var _p:int;
> > > >>
> > > >> private function CTORTest(p:int) {
> > > >> _p = p;
> > > >> }
> > > >>
> > > >> private function anotherFct():CTORTest {
> > > >> return new CTORTest(10);
> > > >> }
> > > >> }
> > > >> }
> > > >> and using the compiled lib:
> > > >>
> > > >> <?xml version="1.0"?>
> > > >> <s:Application xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009";
> > > > xmlns:s="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/spark"
> > > > creationComplete="creationCompleteHandler(event)">
> > > >> <fx:Script><![CDATA[
> > > >> import mx.events.FlexEvent;
> > > >>
> > > >> import myLib.CTORTest;
> > > >>
> > > >> private function creationCompleteHandler(event:FlexEvent):void {
> > > >> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
> > > >> }
> > > >> ]]></fx:Script>
> > > >> </s:Application>
> > > >>
> > > >> gives:
> > > >> [Fault] exception, information=VerifyError: Error #1014: La classe
> > > > myLib:CTORTest::CTORTest est introuvable. (not found) with the legacy
> > > > compiler
> > > >> and:
> > > >> F:\sources\falconTestDrive\shell\src\Main.mxml:9
> > > >> Erreur: Appel d'une méthode qui ne semble pas définie CTORTest. (Call
> > > >> to
> > > > a undefined method)
> > > >> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
> > > >>
> > > >> (I will customize the error message later)
> > > >>
> > > >> I still need to check it works in the 3 possible ways to instantiate a
> > > > Class [1] (at the moment it works only with 1st one), check that works
> > > > with
> > > > is / instanceOf, revisit the cast function accordingly and maybe other
> > > > things not yet in my mind and especially check FP won't complain using
> > > > it.
> > > >>
> > > >> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), new_type_name,
> > > > ContainerID(expression*)) */
> > > >> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), expression,
> > > > ContainerID(expression*)) */
> > > >> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), vector_literal,
> > > > ContainerID(void)) */
> > > >>
> > > >> In case all this works and I'm far to know it at the moment, I will
> > > >> have
> > > > to think about implement "method overloading" otherwise I can't see any
> > > > usage of a protected constructor and therefore will probably require
> > > > some
> > > > help for the best way to implement it.
> > > >
> > > > Exciting to see these kind of experiments. A really good usecase for
> > > > private constructor would be to create a Singleton class, I.e a class
> > > > that
> > > > cannot be instantiated outside of itself. Would that be something you
> > > > can
> > > > test for?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Om
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks,
> > > >> Frédéric THOMAS
> > > >>
> > > >>> From: webdoubl...@hotmail.com
> > > >>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > > >>> Subject: RE: [Falcon] starting up
> > > >>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 16:57:28 +0100
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Ah ok, thanks Gordon, I was tearing my hair out :-)
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Frédéric THOMAS
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> > > >>>> From: gsmit...@hotmail.com
> > > >>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 08:51:16 -0700
> > > >>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> That comment is out of date. Code Model was the part of pre-Falcon
> > > > Flash Builder that built an abstract syntax tree to support intelligent
> > > > editing. We used it as the beginning of Falcon's lexer and parser. The
> > > > code
> > > > is just looking at the AST to see if the constructor has a non-public
> > > > namespace.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> - Gordon
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> On Oct 1, 2014, at 8:33 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <
> > > > webdoubl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> I updated it to v17.0 and check in
> > > > falcon\compiler\generated\dist\sdk\lib\external, is there.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> oops, looking better, it has both, just removed the bad one, it
> > > > runs.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Now, looking at internal\as\codegen\ClassDirectiveProcessor.java, I
> > > > see that:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> // If a constructor has a namespace as part of it's declaration, it
> > > > must be declared public.
> > > >>>>> // It is ok to omit the namespace
> > > >>>>> // We must check the AST, as CM treats all ctors as public no
> > > > matter what the user typed in
> > > >>>>> // so the FunctionDefinition will always be in the public namespace
> > > >>>>> if( node.getActualNamespaceNode() != null &&
> > > >>>>> node.getActualNamespaceNode().getName() !=
> > > > IASKeywordConstants.PUBLIC)
> > > >>>>> problems.add(new
> > > > ConstructorMustBePublicProblem(node.getActualNamespaceNode()));
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> What is the CM or Code Model ?
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Thanks,
> > > >>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> From: aha...@adobe.com
> > > >>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> > > >>>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 13:36:50 +0000
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Could you have an old guava.jar?
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> On 10/1/14 4:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <webdoubl...@hotmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Hi,
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> I built it with ANT an ran Falcon compc.bat from the
> > > > generated/dist/sdk,
> > > >>>>>>> does anyone knows why I get that ?
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> > > >>>>>>> com/google/common/cache/CacheLoader
> > > >>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.MXMLC.<init>(MXMLC.java:379)
> > > >>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.<init>(COMPC.java:54)
> > > >>>>>>> at
> > > > org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.staticMainNoExit(COMPC.java:75)
> > > >>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.main(COMPC.java:63)
> > > >>>>>>> Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
> > > >>>>>>> com.google.common.cache.CacheLoader
> > > >>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)
> > > >>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)
> > > >>>>>>> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
> > > >>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)
> > > >>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:424)
> > > >>>>>>> at sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:308)
> > > >>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
> > > >>>>>>> ... 4 more
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Thanks,
> > > >>>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> > > >>
> >
>
