To add, that they also know that the JS to TS is not clean cut and their are some things that might not work right or take a large amount of time to get working correctly.
Mike On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 9:36 AM, Michael Schmalle <teotigraphix...@gmail.com > wrote: > That is the debate and I think the main compiler devs are against it. They > want to keep the compiler JavaScript standards based. > > Although, you don't see them saying it's a bad idea, just that they want > to keep the compiler "agnostic". I think they are meeting half way with > types and annotations. > > I'm thinking about contributing to this project in the future, I am really > impressed with their framework and compiler. > > Their codegen path is not a clean plugin approach, so it is not a trivial > task producing TypeScript as it is. > > Mike > > On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 9:31 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > >> Is another option is to output TS instead of JS? >> >> On 6/15/15, 3:35 AM, "Erik de Bruin" <e...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> So Erik, are you saying that since it soon will fully support ES6, the >> >> FalconJX compiler should be able to emit ES6? >> >> >> > >> >Most certainly. The combination of ES6 and 'TypeScript typing' >> (ES6_TYPED) >> >support should make the life of FalconJX much easier. To me it seems that >> >there is lot's less 'transpilation' necessary to go from AS to ES6_TYPED >> >than is currently needed. >> > >> >Also: I do think that ES6 is already fully supported, although maybe not >> >at >> >'zarro boogs'. The main interesting thing to watch for is how far they >> >will >> >take the 'TypeScript' support. From what I've been reading (forums and >> >GitHub), it looks like they may go for the full monty (fingers crossed). >> > >> >EdB >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >-- >> >Ix Multimedia Software >> > >> >Jan Luykenstraat 27 >> >3521 VB Utrecht >> > >> >T. 06-51952295 >> >I. www.ixsoftware.nl >> >> >
