Yeah, but that is a very, very different design pattern and would require
substantial work on the transpiler to make that output possible. It would
also, I believe, be incompatible with the way the GCC optimizes (not
minimize, mind you) the code, so that advantage would be lost as well.
As our JS output is basically immutable, I think these discussions are
missing the point and feel like trying to second guess the machine
code/assembly that this JS basically is.
When properly annotated, the GCC warns or throws an error if the code seems
to access 'privileged' members, but I'd guess that the AS compiler does the
same, so why worry?
EdB
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 5:45 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala <bigosma...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Jun 25, 2015 8:07 AM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 6/25/15, 8:02 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <webdoubl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >> Ah ok. That’s probably a bug. Not sure why, but the emitters currently
> > >> initialize private members in the constructor. We discussed on some
> > >>other
> > >> thread a while back that this shouldn’t be necessary except for
> > >>non-scalar
> > >> initializers, so probably we should try to change this someday.
> > >
> > >Initializing methods in the constructor via myPrivateMethod = function()
> > >{) will make it private but public instance methods not initialized in
> > >the constructor won't be able to access it, public methods which aim to
> > >access private methods need also to be declared in the contructor (eg.
> > >"this.myPublicMethod = function() {return myPrivateMethod())")
> >
> > Really? I wasn’t aware of that. I didn’t think JS had any access
> > protection at all.
> >
> > >
> > >But do we need to replicate the AS3 NS behaviour in JS (public, private,
> > >protected, custom NS) ?
> > >
> > >Has it been already discussed ?
> > >
> > >I'm not sure, my first answer would be no as the the developer will
> > >develop in AS3 but if the code to be tested is the JS, I would answer
> > >yes, we must reproduce what AS3 promises, the public, protected, private
> > >and custom NS for classes and instances.
> >
> > I thought everything in JS was effectively public, that there was no
> > access protection. But we are currently using Google Closure Compiler to
> > minify all of the JS (and will probably always have a way for folks to
> > choose to use it) and I think Erik says that proper use of @private helps
> > the minifier.
> >
> > I’m not sure how we’d handle custom namespaces.
> >
> > -Alex
> >
>
> In Javascript we can create public, private and privileged variables,
> using closures.
>
> http://javascript.crockford.com/private.html
>
> Thanks,
> Om
>
--
Ix Multimedia Software
Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht
T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl
