> The drawback is there are too much build confs and args too 
pass, I guess it can refrain the users, I would like to make it more 
friendly:
> 
> - compile both swc + js or swf + js if -js-output-type=FLEXJS_DUAL,
 calling chained both of the compiler having generated the include-file 
first
> - add a include-all-classes and exclude-classes

It seems I won't have to do the second item.
Instead I created a /ide/IntelliJ/flex-config.xml that overrides as needed the 
intelliJ one, doing so, we benefit of the IntelliJ configuration too, the 
override can be done, per module or per project,  this one is more convenient 
when the project contains only FlexJS relative stuffs.

I would have liked its option to include files into the swc be as smart as the 
include-files but it is not, it doesn't remap the entry, it only includes the 
file with the same path.

So, I still need to implement the first item.

Frédéric THOMAS

> From: aha...@adobe.com
> To: webdoubl...@hotmail.com; dev@flex.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [Falcon.jx] -library-path
> Date: Sat, 30 May 2015 20:30:45 +0000
> 
> I'm in favor of automating any repetitive process. Things are the way they 
> are due to lack of time.
> 
> 
> Sent from my LG G3, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
> 
> 
> ------ Original message------
> 
> From: Frédéric THOMAS
> 
> Date: Sat, May 30, 2015 1:24 PM
> 
> To: dev@flex.apache.org;
> 
> Subject:RE: [Falcon.jx] -library-path
> 
> 
> It worked better but compilation failed with one error but the problem hasn't 
> been reported, I will have to dig into.
> 
> The drawback is there are too much build confs and args too pass, I guess it 
> can refrain the users, I would like to make it more friendly:
> 
> - compile both swc + js or swf + js if -js-output-type=FLEXJS_DUAL, calling 
> chained both of the compiler having generated the include-file first
> - add a include-all-classes and exclude-classes
> 
> Thought ?
> 
> Frédéric THOMAS
> 
> > From: aha...@adobe.com
> > To: webdoubl...@hotmail.com; dev@flex.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [Falcon.jx] -library-path
> > Date: Sat, 30 May 2015 19:33:04 +0000
> >
> > The swcs we build use include-file in compile-config.xml. we currently run 
> > compc after compjsc.
> >
> >
> > Sent from my LG G3, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
> >
> >
> > ------ Original message------
> >
> > From: Frédéric THOMAS
> >
> > Date: Sat, May 30, 2015 12:28 PM
> >
> > To: dev@flex.apache.org;
> >
> > Subject:RE: [Falcon.jx] -library-path
> >
> >
> > > Is this with ij or ant as well?
> >
> > I build the lib with IJ using the default flex-config.xml and no other 
> > argument, it results in a swc without the JS, adding 
> > -js-output-type=FLEXJS, I get the js, my question was, is there already 
> > something to build the swc included the js (and catalog updated I guess) ?
> >
> > >From ant we build framework swc and compile apps
> >
> > I didn't get that !?
> >
> > Frédéric THOMAS
> >
> > > From: aha...@adobe.com
> > > To: webdoubl...@hotmail.com; dev@flex.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: [Falcon.jx] -library-path
> > > Date: Sat, 30 May 2015 19:21:22 +0000
> > >
> > > Is this with ij or ant as well? From ant we build framework swc and 
> > > compile apps
> > >
> > >
> > > Sent from my LG G3, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
> > >
> > >
> > > ------ Original message------
> > >
> > > From: Frédéric THOMAS
> > >
> > > Date: Sat, May 30, 2015 11:58 AM
> > >
> > > To: dev@flex.apache.org<mailto:dev@flex.apache.org>;
> > >
> > > Subject:[Falcon.jx] -library-path
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I was trying to compile an App with a Lib in FlexJS and seen few things:
> > >
> > > - The MXMLFlexJSPublisher doesn't pass the the ProblemQuery to 
> > > GoogDepsWriter.getListOfFile, we end up with a NPE (easy to fix)
> > > - The addDeps() throws a RTE instead of a Problem, what do we want as 
> > > Problem here ?
> > >
> > > Adding models/MyModel.js to the swc didn't work for me, I didn't check 
> > > but my guess is because it was not added to the catalog ?
> > >
> > > How am I suppose to proceed to compile in the same time my swc / js and 
> > > having it included ?
> > >
> > > Frédéric THOMAS
> >
> 
                                          

Reply via email to