On 6/1/15, 3:41 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <webdoubl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Thinking about it some more, I think to build, for example, the >>Core.swc, >> we would run CompJSC with one set of settings (different >>-js-output-type, >> different library paths that point to a JS.swc and HTMLNative.swc) that >> would product JS files, then another run with CompJSC with a different >>set >> of settings (the ones it uses today) to cross-compile some other AS code >> to produce more JS files. Then somehow we want to compile all of the AS >> into a SWC with library.swf and catalog.xml. I guess chaining will >>help, >> but I’m thinking you’ll also want to run just one of the compilers as >>you >> fix bugs in certain areas. > >It > is exactly what allows my new implementation, you can pass any valid >js-output-type or FLEXJS_DUAL, if FLEXJS_DUAL it will prepare phase1 >only in case of COMPJSC for the compilation appening the output to have a > js/out structure, call COMPJSC, in case of success and FLEXJS_DUAL then > prepare phase2 (include the transpiled JS files, remove js-output-type) > and call COMPC, for the couple MXMLJSC / MXMLC, only chain the compiler > call and remove the js-output-type on phase2. > >Does it sound enough ? I guess so. Seems worth a try. Thanks for working on it. -Alex
