>>So, why to generate the .abc and compare its modify date while we can do
>>that with the source file ?
>
> We would compare source file date against .abc file date and then use the
> abc as if it were from a swc and not compile the source file.
Can't do more on anything today but will follow that path, indeed I guess I
will need yours or Mike's help regarding the compilation itself at some point.
Thanks,
Frédéric THOMAS
----------------------------------------
> From: aha...@adobe.com
> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [FalconJX] Unit test shows full use of pure actionscript to
> javascript compile
> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 15:48:36 +0000
>
>
>
> On 6/10/15, 8:36 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <webdoubl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Volunteers are welcome to try to fix it. Or implement a whole new
>>> incremental compile strategy. I think I’ve noticed that Java compiler
>>> writes out an .class file and uses file dates to determine whether to
>>> compile again and seems to do that very quickly. I’ve pondered whether
>>> Falcon would get similar gains if we wrote out .abc files.
>>
>>So, it seems the compiler maintains a kind of session between the
>>compilation, how ?
>
> IIRC, the compiler would checksum public APIs and write it to a temporary
> file. The strategy of only re-compiling files affected by public APIs
> changed in other files is interesting, but seemed to be buggy.
>
>>So, why to generate the .abc and compare its modify date while we can do
>>that with the source file ?
>
> We would compare source file date against .abc file date and then use the
> abc as if it were from a swc and not compile the source file.
>
> -Alex
>
