Fred, what file were you looking at regarding asdoc? It looks like class
asdoc doesn’t get copied, and asdoc is not generated inside
Object.defineProperties structures.
-Alex
On 6/24/15, 5:40 PM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com> wrote:
>I'll try to test keep asdoc and compc.
>
>
>When we wrote js we were not sure of naming conventions. Google seems to
>like backing variables to end with dash but flex starts with dash. Not
>sure what to do. I'm thinking we change to end with dash.
>
>
>Sent from my LG G3, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
>
>
>------ Original message------
>
>From: Frédéric THOMAS
>
>Date: Wed, Jun 24, 2015 4:21 PM
>
>To: dev@flex.apache.org;
>
>Subject:RE: [FalconJX FlexJS] JQuery up and running, a nightmare but we
>now have 1.9 in AS
>
>
>I'm surprised the ./js/src is hand written as it seems "almost" the same
> than what the cross-compile code looks like, if I cross-compile Corre, I
> get in IStrand:
>
>org_apache_flex_core_IStrand.prototype.getBeadByType =
>function(classOrInterface) {
>};
>
>in ./js/src:
>
>/**
> * getBeadByType()
> *
> * @expose
> * @param {Object} classOrInterface The type of bead to look for.
> * @return {org_apache_flex_core_IBead} The bead.
> */
>org_apache_flex_core_IStrand.prototype.getBeadByType =
>function(classOrInterface) {};
>
>Even
> with -keep-asdoc, I haven't the comments from .as reported, neither I
>have the @expose or the type annotation, but if I look at
>Application.js, for the strand property, they are the same comment, why ?
>
>/**
> * @protected
> * @type {org_apache_flex_core_IStrand}
> */
>org_apache_flex_core_BeadViewBase.prototype._strand;
>
>and in js/src
>
>/**
> * @protected
> * @type {Object}
> */
>org_apache_flex_core_BeadViewBase.prototype._strand = null;
>
>Another thing, in ClassFactory:
>
>org_apache_flex_core_ClassFactory = function(generator) {
> generator = typeof generator !== 'undefined' ? generator : null;
> this.generator = generator;
>};
>
>in .js/src:
>
>org_apache_flex_core_ClassFactory = function(generator) {
> /**
> * @private
> * @type {Function}
> */
> this.generator_ = generator;
> this.properties_ = null;
>};
>
>Why to use generator_ and properties_, reserved word ?
>
>I
> did that as a test before I start other experiments with conditional
>compilation to check if I can trust the cross-compiled code.
>
>
>Frédéric THOMAS
>
>
>----------------------------------------
>> From: aha...@adobe.com
>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [FalconJX FlexJS] JQuery up and running, a nightmare but
>>we now have 1.9 in AS
>> Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 22:04:23 +0000
>>
>> In these project directories, you should find:
>>
>> ./as - AS written against Flash (Sprite, TextField, etc) for SWF output
>> ./asjs - AS that is written against abstractions to be used in a SWF or
>> cross-compiled to js
>> ./js/src - JS that is handwritten to be used on the JS side.
>> ./js/out - JS that was cross-compiled from ./asjs
>>
>> The task is how to get rid of ./js/src and replace it with AS written
>> against js.swc. I only tried Network/HTTPService and decided that
>> conditional compiling would be better, but I haven’t figured out how to
>> deal with different base classes like HTMLElementWrapper in js/src but
>>not
>> in as. IOW, UIBase has different base classes at some point (Sprite vs
>> HTMLElementWrapper). If conditional compilation works everywhere that’s
>> awesome, but if we need some other folder full of .as that only compiles
>> against js.swc that’s fine too. We won’t know until we really try it. I
>> wasn’t going to try right now so feel free if that’s what you want to
>>work
>> on.
>>
>> What happens in the build script is that ./as and ./asjs are compiled
>>into
>> a SWC with COMPC just to make sure it compiles cleanly since it runs
>> faster than COMPJSC so we find errors sooner. Then COMPJSC compiles
>> ./asjs into ./js/out. Then we run COMPC again to pack the ./js folder
>> into the SWC. Someday the COMPJSC probably need to be able to pack the
>>js
>> directly into the SWC so we don’t have to run COMPC twice, or maybe we
>> should skip the first run of COMPC.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Alex
>>
>>
>> On 6/24/15, 1:35 PM, "Michael Schmalle" <teotigraphix...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 4:33 PM, Frédéric THOMAS
>>><webdoubl...@hotmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>> So, now, I guess those Core/js classes have been generated but how ?
>>>> what's the process ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>What are you talking about? As far as I know all the Core/js were and
>>>written and need to be back ported to AS now. anything in an out
>>>directory
>>>was generated.
>>>
>>>Mike
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----------------------------------------
>>>>> From: webdoubl...@hotmail.com
>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>>>>> Subject: RE: [FalconJX FlexJS] JQuery up and running, a nightmare but
>>>>we
>>>> now have 1.9 in AS
>>>>> Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 21:21:46 +0100
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, sorry, I got it !!
>>>>>
>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ----------------------------------------
>>>>>> From: webdoubl...@hotmail.com
>>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>>>>>> Subject: RE: [FalconJX FlexJS] JQuery up and running, a nightmare
>>>>>>but
>>>> we now have 1.9 in AS
>>>>>> Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 21:03:17 +0100
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Try the -keep-asdoc flag on MXMLJSC.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Actually, it is what I did, I tried to compile the asjs project
>>>>Core/as
>>>> to js hoping to get the same result than what I can see in Core/js
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What it doesn't compiler the same ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----------------------------------------
>>>>>>> From: aha...@adobe.com
>>>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [FalconJX FlexJS] JQuery up and running, a nightmare
>>>>but
>>>> we now have 1.9 in AS
>>>>>>> Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 17:53:56 +0000
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Try the -keep-asdoc flag on MXMLJSC. But the deal is that none of
>>>>these
>>>>>>> .as or .js files factor into the final app since they are all
>>>>externs
>>>> so
>>>>>>> <inject_html> won’t be seen.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So yes, folks can use conditional compile to add stuff, but
>>>>requiring a
>>>>>>> base class may be easier for the developers. Anyway, we’ll find out
>>>> when
>>>>>>> more people use it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Alex
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 6/24/15, 10:12 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <webdoubl...@hotmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I’m not opposed to it. IMO, injecting Jquery’s scripts should be
>>>>>>>>> automatic. It is in the FlexJS Jquery.swc because you subclass
>>>>>>>>> org.apache.flex.jquery.Application and that automatically results
>>>>in
>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> script being added to the head.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This externs-based swc concept is too new to know what is right
>>>>>>>>>or
>>>>>>>>>wrong.
>>>>>>>>> Just keep on coding and we’ll see repeating patterns emerge and
>>>>>>>>> encapsulate them. Folks will try it and like it or not. No need
>>>>>>>>>to
>>>> guess
>>>>>>>>> up front. Thanks for figuring it out.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>This is true it is a bit edge case, only for externs based
>>>>applications
>>>>>>>>at the moment, it could become less true if want to use conditional
>>>>>>>>compilation for framework components too IMO and let the creator
>>>>build
>>>> it
>>>>>>>>in one shot, in 2 shots, he could still modify the generated JS to
>>>>>>>>include the <inject_html> though.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Btw,
>>>>>>>> I had a look at the Closure Compiler Externs Extractor [1] but the
>>>>>>>>result of the extracted lib [2] doesn't show any type annotations,
>>>>>>>>I
>>>>>>>>guess this is normal but I wonder how those google externs like
>>>>>>>>this
>>>> one
>>>>>>>>[3] have been built ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Another thing, why when I cross compile IStand, I don't have the
>>>> comments
>>>>>>>>generated like:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>/**
>>>>>>>> * addBead()
>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>> * @expose
>>>>>>>> * @param {org_apache_flex_core_IBead} bead The bead to add.
>>>>>>>> */
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I've got that only:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>/**
>>>>>>>> * org.apache.flex.core.IStrand
>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>> * @fileoverview
>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>> * @suppress {checkTypes}
>>>>>>>> */
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>goog.provide('org_apache_flex_core_IStrand');
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>/**
>>>>>>>> * @interface
>>>>>>>> */
>>>>>>>>org_apache_flex_core_IStrand = function() {
>>>>>>>>};
>>>>>>>>org_apache_flex_core_IStrand.prototype.addBead = function(bead) {
>>>>>>>>};
>>>>>>>>org_apache_flex_core_IStrand.prototype.getBeadByType =
>>>>>>>>function(classOrInterface) {
>>>>>>>>};
>>>>>>>>org_apache_flex_core_IStrand.prototype.removeBead = function(bead)
>>>>>>>>{
>>>>>>>>};
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>/**
>>>>>>>> * Metadata
>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>> * @type {Object.<string, Array.<Object>>}
>>>>>>>> */
>>>>>>>>org_apache_flex_core_IStrand.prototype.FLEXJS_CLASS_INFO = { names:
>>>>[{
>>>>>>>>name: 'IStrand', qName: 'org_apache_flex_core_IStrand'}] };
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>>>>Frédéric THOMAS
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>[1] http://www.dotnetwise.com/Code/Externs/
>>>>>>>>[2] http://code.jquery.com/jquery-2.1.4.js
>>>>>>>>[3]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>https://raw.githubusercontent.com/google/closure-compiler/master/contri
>>>>b/
>>>>e
>>>>>>>>xterns/angular-1.3.js
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>----------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> From: aha...@adobe.com
>>>>>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [FalconJX FlexJS] JQuery up and running, a nightmare
>>>>but
>>>>>>>>>we now have 1.9 in AS
>>>>>>>>> Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 05:59:45 +0000
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 6/23/15, 10:03 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <webdoubl...@hotmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Yes, it's cool, it simplified my life as well as being able to
>>>>modify
>>>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>>html head from AS, for example here with the dynamic loading of
>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>>jQuery lib but it seems I'm the only one happy with that :-)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>No interests to add such feature to the framework though ?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I’m not opposed to it. IMO, injecting Jquery’s scripts should be
>>>>>>>>> automatic. It is in the FlexJS Jquery.swc because you subclass
>>>>>>>>> org.apache.flex.jquery.Application and that automatically results
>>>>in
>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> script being added to the head.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This externs-based swc concept is too new to know what is right
>>>>>>>>>or
>>>>>>>>>wrong.
>>>>>>>>> Just keep on coding and we’ll see repeating patterns emerge and
>>>>>>>>> encapsulate them. Folks will try it and like it or not. No need
>>>>>>>>>to
>>>> guess
>>>>>>>>> up front. Thanks for figuring it out.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -Alex
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
