On 6/2/15, 12:06 PM, "Michael Schmalle" <teotigraphix...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 6/2/15, 10:38 AM, "Michael Schmalle" <teotigraphix...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>>
>> >3. flexjs_wrapper can't exist on Element, it's not dynamic, does it
>>nee to
>> >be dynamic or do we just use array access?
>> >
>> >this.element['flexjs_wrapper'] = this;
>>
>> Ah yes, there are some places where we hack JS “classes”. I’m open to
>> ideas on what to do. Can we subclass Element and add flexjs_wrapper?
>>
>>
>I don't think we want to do this, Element is on the DOM so when and
>Element
>is used it will need to be of type Element when it gets compiled.
>
>I was just thinking of a getting in the super class;
>
>protected function get wrapper():Object {
> return element['flexjs_wrapper'];
>}
>
>What type is the wrapper, an Element? Still learning here.
>
The wrapper is a UIBase for UI Elements, but it is some non-UIBase for
HTTPService which is wrapping XMLHTTPRequest.
>>>4. For DOM elements and the closure compiler, does it expect type
>>>Element,
>> >for instance is below correct?
>> >
>> >/**
>> > * @expose
>> > * @type {Element}
>> > */
>> >org_apache_flex_core_UIBase.prototype.positioner;
>>
>> Not sure what you mean by “expect”, but the code snippet should work.
>>
>
>Well I am trying to keep my bearings straight, gcc "knows about" Element
>in
>the DOM so it needs to be Element.
OK, UIBase.positioner and UIBase.element are often the same thing.
Thanks,
-Alex
