Just to add, you probably figured it out, when I said emitClass(), I meant
all of them, since you can't have any constants, classes, interfaces, enums
or typedefs created for external externs.
You get the idea. :)
MIke
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 5:14 PM, Josh Tynjala <joshtynj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Okay, I looked over the source code. I think I understand how to implement
> it. I'll give it a shot. Hopefully, I'll have something good to report
> later today.
>
> - Josh
>
> On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Michael Schmalle <
> teotigraphix...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 4:49 PM, Josh Tynjala <joshtynj...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Yes, that makes sense. I incorrectly assumed it knew how to get that
> > > information from SWCs too.
> > >
> > > So, if I understand you correctly, this -external-externs argument
> > doesn't
> > > exist yet? It still needs to be added to externc?
> > >
> >
> >
> > Correct, the EXTERNC client doesn't have any idea about the SWC in the
> > first stage of javascript parsing, that is the closure compiler Java
> API(no
> > AS at all).
> >
> > The flag needs to be added to the configuration, ExternCConfiguration,
> you
> > then need to save the names in a list. Then during the emit stage, check
> > the AST nodes which each ClassReference saves for the file name of the
> > source and exlcude it if it is contained within the list during the
> > emitClass() call.
> >
> > The above is how I would implement it, then nothing is generated for the
> > external externs file.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> > > - Josh
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Michael Schmalle <
> > > teotigraphix...@gmail.com
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Ah! Yes, this is a "problem" because to generate the correct AS, we
> > need
> > > > the extern to be loaded in the closure compiler for my AST resolver
> to
> > > work
> > > > correctly.
> > > >
> > > > So actually, there is no bug, other than you need to supply
> > dependencies
> > > to
> > > > the javascript compiler(Closure Compiler).
> > > >
> > > > So, what needs to be added is an -external-externs compiler arg that
> > will
> > > > be used to load and be parsed for the AST but NOT be emitted during
> the
> > > > emit() phase.
> > > >
> > > > Does this make sense to you?
> > > >
> > > > Mike
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 4:08 PM, Josh Tynjala <joshtynj...@gmail.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > 1. Yes, but let's take CreateJS out of the equation. It's not
> > necessary
> > > > to
> > > > > reproduce the error.
> > > > >
> > > > > I created the following nativemouseevent-extern.js:
> > > > >
> > > > > /**
> > > > > * @constructor
> > > > > * @extends {MouseEvent}
> > > > > * @param {string} type
> > > > > * @param {MouseEventInit=} opt_eventInitDict
> > > > > */
> > > > > function NativeMouseEvent(type, opt_eventInitDict) {}
> > > > >
> > > > > When passed to externc, it produces the following AS3:
> > > > >
> > > > > package {
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > /**
> > > > > * @see [nativemouseevent-externs]
> > > > > */
> > > > > public class NativeMouseEvent extends MouseEvent {
> > > > >
> > > > > /**
> > > > > * @param type [string]
> > > > > * @param opt_eventInitDict [(MouseEventInit|null|undefined)]
> > > > > * @see [nativemouseevent-externs]
> > > > > */
> > > > > public function NativeMouseEvent(type:String,
> > > > > opt_eventInitDict:MouseEventInit = null) {
> > > > > super();
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > }
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > Notice that super() in the constructor has no arguments. In fact,
> it
> > > > should
> > > > > have two:
> > > > >
> > > > > super(null, null);
> > > > >
> > > > > From w3c_event.js, you can see the MouseEvent constructor has two
> > > > > arguments:
> > > > >
> > > > > /**
> > > > > * @constructor
> > > > > * @extends {UIEvent}
> > > > > * @param {string} type
> > > > > * @param {MouseEventInit=} opt_eventInitDict
> > > > > */
> > > > > function MouseEvent(type, opt_eventInitDict) {}
> > > > >
> > > > > If I also pass w3c_event.js to externc, to basically override what
> > was
> > > > > already compiled into js.swc, it will produce the correct
> super(null,
> > > > null)
> > > > > instead. So, at least as far as I can tell, if the extern is
> already
> > > > > compiled to a SWC, some information about the number of constructor
> > > > > arguments seems to get lost somehow. If it's still a raw JS extern,
> > it
> > > > > works fine.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2. I did not modify any extern files to produce this error. I will
> be
> > > > > modifying a third-party extern file (not one of Google's), but this
> > > issue
> > > > > comes up before I even get that far.
> > > > >
> > > > > 3. jsc is giving me a compiler error because externc is not
> producing
> > > > valid
> > > > > AS3.
> > > > >
> > > > > At this point, I'm not really using an IDE yet. I just wanted to
> get
> > a
> > > > > handle on the command line first.
> > > > >
> > > > > - Josh
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Michael Schmalle <
> > > > > teotigraphix...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Josh,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am having one of those days, but I still am not quite getting
> > what
> > > is
> > > > > > happening with the constructor stuff.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Can you spell it out one more time with maybe something I can try
> > for
> > > > > > myself?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. So are you saying you are creating a .js file that you are
> > having
> > > > > > externc.jar parse and emit for CreatJS?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2. Can you show me what you modified in googles extern file to
> > create
> > > > > what
> > > > > > you want?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 3. So it's actually the jsc compiler jar that is giving you that
> > > error
> > > > > > correct? Not an IDE.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Mike
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Josh Tynjala <
> > joshtynj...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I actually don't need the typedef stuff right now. I was trying
> > to
> > > > use
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > same workaround that the CreateJS TypeScript definitions use to
> > > avoid
> > > > > > > naming conflicts between MouseEvent and createjs.MouseEvent. It
> > > > > creates a
> > > > > > > fake class named NativeMouseEvent that extends MouseEvent. I
> was
> > > > trying
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > modify the Closure externs to use the same trick. Basically,
> I'm
> > > not
> > > > > > > actually instantiating this subclass. It's just a workaround to
> > > make
> > > > a
> > > > > > > certain property strongly typed in AS3 without creating a class
> > > name
> > > > > > > conflict.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If I manually go in and change the super() to super(null, null)
> > > > before
> > > > > I
> > > > > > > compile the generated AS3, I'm good to go.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - Josh
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Michael Schmalle <
> > > > > > > teotigraphix...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Weird, looking at the generated source;
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > /**
> > > > > > > > * @param type [string]
> > > > > > > > * @param opt_eventInitDict
> > [(MouseEventInit|null|undefined)]
> > > > > > > > * @see [w3c_event]
> > > > > > > > */
> > > > > > > > public function MouseEvent(type:String,
> > > > > > > > opt_eventInitDict:MouseEventInit = null) {
> > > > > > > > super(null, null);
> > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It's right, so I don't know what is happening in SWC the
> > > compiler.
> > > > I
> > > > > > did
> > > > > > > > write logic that climbs the super chain to find the method
> > > > > signature. I
> > > > > > > > said in a previous email that we can't use native because for
> > > some
> > > > > > reason
> > > > > > > > COMPC does't keep the optional args, weird I know.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > BTW, MouseEventInitis a @typedef and I havn't fully
> implemented
> > > > them
> > > > > > > > because they are weird and hard. :)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Sometimes a @typedef could be a String, Boolean etc or an
> > actual
> > > > > > defined
> > > > > > > > struct class.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > So I think I need some major logic to check whether it is a
> > > pointer
> > > > > to
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > native type which it would be converted to that native type,
> or
> > > if
> > > > > > it's a
> > > > > > > > struct create the fields and this is where we would have to
> > have
> > > a
> > > > > > > > JavaScript transform. At compile time, you have the typed
> > object
> > > > but
> > > > > in
> > > > > > > > reality, it is just a plain {} object and not a javascript
> > > > > > "type/class".
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I wasn't going to get into this typedef stuff until people
> > > started
> > > > > > using
> > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > because it isn't trivial.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > But now that you are, I can see what I can to to normalize
> it.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Mike
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Josh Tynjala <
> > > > > joshtynj...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Yeah, I think metadata would be acceptable too. If that
> seems
> > > > > easier
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > you, I say let's do that.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I just found another issue in externc. I tried to subclass
> > > > > > MouseEvent,
> > > > > > > > > which is compiled into js.swc. It's not correctly
> determining
> > > the
> > > > > > > number
> > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > constructor arguments for MouseEvent, so when I try to
> > compile
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > subclass
> > > > > > > > > in AS3, it gives me this error.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Error: Incorrect number of arguments. Expected 1
> > > > > > > > > super();
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > MouseEvent has two constructor arguments, so I think it
> > should
> > > be
> > > > > > > > emitting
> > > > > > > > > super(null, null); instead.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > In fact, when I manually add w3c_events.js to my
> > configuration,
> > > > > then
> > > > > > > > > externc correctly adds super(null, null);. So it seems to
> > > figure
> > > > > out
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > number of constructor arguments from raw JS, but once the
> > class
> > > > is
> > > > > > > > already
> > > > > > > > > compiled into a SWC, it's losing that information somehow.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > - Josh
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 3:53 AM, Michael Schmalle <
> > > > > > > > > teotigraphix...@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 1) That is a bug, I think I hard-coded a quick fix on
> > things
> > > > that
> > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > @template tag and I immediately transformed them to
> Object
> > > > > without
> > > > > > > > > checking
> > > > > > > > > > the for optional or var arg declarations. I can fix this,
> > > it's
> > > > > only
> > > > > > > > > methods
> > > > > > > > > > with that tag and there are no very many.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 2) Yeah, I figured as much, I had experience with Randori
> > and
> > > > > > pretty
> > > > > > > > much
> > > > > > > > > > knew this was going to come up.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > That way I see it is, the absolute minimum solution to
> this
> > > > > problem
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > getting the "problem" to be the same that is in IDEs
> today
> > > and
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > is,
> > > > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > > > can't use two classes of the same name without having to
> > > > qualify
> > > > > > one.
> > > > > > > > To
> > > > > > > > > > me, this is a fix until this project gets momentum to go
> > > > farther
> > > > > > down
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > rabbit hole.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I know Alex chimed in but here is my opinion from
> > experience;
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Introduce a JavaScript tag that can be resolved at
> run-time
> > > to
> > > > > > reduce
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > name back into it's native JavaScript
> identifier/package. I
> > > > have
> > > > > > gone
> > > > > > > > > back
> > > > > > > > > > and forth with Alex about this, asdoc verses metadata
> but,
> > > > > metadata
> > > > > > > > gets
> > > > > > > > > > saved in a SWC and asdoc doesn't. For my ideas to work we
> > > must
> > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > > metadata in an external library to resolve the true
> > > javascript
> > > > > > > > identifier
> > > > > > > > > > when transpileing.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > [JavaScript(name=Event")]
> > > > > > > > > > package org.apache.flex.dom {
> > > > > > > > > > public class Event {}
> > > > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > IMHO to fix this, there has to be a sacrifice in one of
> the
> > > > > > "links".
> > > > > > > To
> > > > > > > > > me
> > > > > > > > > > that is putting the core classes in an apache.dom package
> > and
> > > > use
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > [JavaScript] metadata rewrite to reduce the package name
> > > during
> > > > > > cross
> > > > > > > > > > compile.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > With the above, you automatically solve all problems and
> > only
> > > > > > create
> > > > > > > > one
> > > > > > > > > > new one, you have to import DOM level classes. The
> EXTERNC
> > > > > compiler
> > > > > > > IMO
> > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > still basic, it can understand basic package structures
> > when
> > > > > > defining
> > > > > > > > > > externs, so we can have a createjs.Event and an
> > > > > > > > > org.apache.flex.dom.Event.
> > > > > > > > > > We can add a new config to the EXTERNC compiler that is
> > > > > > > > > > -base-package="org.apache.flex.dom".
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > We could also configure it to leave global constants,
> > > functions
> > > > > in
> > > > > > > > global
> > > > > > > > > > namespace, as well as config a list of global classes
> such
> > as
> > > > > > Object
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > Array so this doesn't screw up inheritance and leave out
> > the
> > > > kewl
> > > > > > > > > > document:HTMLDocument stuff.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > There are many details I would need to test and implement
> > > doing
> > > > > > what
> > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > > described, but I already did it in the Randori compiler.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > As far as the other suggestions, since this is no-paid
> free
> > > > > time, I
> > > > > > > am
> > > > > > > > > > looking for the quick solution that others don't think is
> > out
> > > > in
> > > > > > left
> > > > > > > > > > field.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Let me know.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > PS I wish we could add on to the language, but from my
> > > > > perspective
> > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > IDE
> > > > > > > > > > support that isn't even an option...
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Mike
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 8:06 PM, Josh Tynjala <
> > > > > > joshtynj...@gmail.com
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Hey Mike,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I finally got a chance to start playing around with
> some
> > of
> > > > > your
> > > > > > > work
> > > > > > > > > > > today. I've been starting out with externc. I've run
> > into a
> > > > > > couple
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > issues. One you already know about. Let's start with
> the
> > > > other
> > > > > > one,
> > > > > > > > > > > though...
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > 1) It looks like the Array class constructor has the
> > wrong
> > > > > > > signature.
> > > > > > > > > > This
> > > > > > > > > > > is from the es3.js extern:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > /**
> > > > > > > > > > > * @constructor
> > > > > > > > > > > * @param {...*} var_args
> > > > > > > > > > > * @return {!Array.<?>}
> > > > > > > > > > > * @nosideeffects
> > > > > > > > > > > * @template T
> > > > > > > > > > > * @see
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://developer.mozilla.org/en/Core_JavaScript_1.5_Reference/Global_Objects/Array
> > > > > > > > > > > */
> > > > > > > > > > > function Array(var_args) {}
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > It looks like externc is producing the following AS3:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > public function Array(var_args:Object) {}
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > However, I think it's meant to produce this AS3
> instead:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > public function Array(...var_args:Array) {}
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > There are probably other functions with the same issue
> > too.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > 2) I immediately ran into that issue where a top-level
> > > class
> > > > > > > > interferes
> > > > > > > > > > > with a class that has the same name in a package.
> > > > w3c_event.js
> > > > > > > > defines
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > top-level Event class, and CreateJS has a
> createjs.Event
> > > > class.
> > > > > > > It's
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > exact same issue that you brought up earlier. I think I
> > > > > dismissed
> > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > too
> > > > > > > > > > > quickly. I apologize for that.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > At the time, I was thinking that FlexJS could easily
> work
> > > > > around
> > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > because
> > > > > > > > > > > be new code. However, now that I'm running into the
> > > collision
> > > > > > > > > directly, I
> > > > > > > > > > > realize that this is going to be a big issue with
> > external
> > > > > > > libraries.
> > > > > > > > > > Like
> > > > > > > > > > > CreateJS, a ton of existing JS frameworks define their
> > own
> > > > > Event
> > > > > > > > type.
> > > > > > > > > > This
> > > > > > > > > > > issue is going to come up a lot. You're absolutely
> right:
> > > it
> > > > > > needs
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > > > > addressed somehow.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I have some ideas. Some involve changes to the AS3
> > > language.
> > > > I
> > > > > > > don't
> > > > > > > > > know
> > > > > > > > > > > if that's on the table, but I'll throw them out there
> > > anyway.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > If AS3 would let us do something like this, the issue
> > > > wouldn't
> > > > > be
> > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > > > bad:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > import global.Event;
> > > > > > > > > > > import createjs.Event;
> > > > > > > > > > > var event2:createjs.Event; //createjs
> > > > > > > > > > > var event:global.Event; //native
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > But AS3 doesn't provide any kind of identifier to refer
> > to
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > top-level
> > > > > > > > > > > package. Even if it did, though, always being forced to
> > use
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > fully-qualified class name would get annoying. At least
> > if
> > > > > there
> > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > two
> > > > > > > > > > > packages, you only need to do it when they're both
> > > imported.
> > > > > With
> > > > > > > one
> > > > > > > > > > class
> > > > > > > > > > > in the top-level, you always need to do it.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Alternatively, TypeScript has some interesting import
> > > syntax
> > > > > > that I
> > > > > > > > > > > remember wishing we could use in AS3:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > import CreateJSEvent = createjs.Event;
> > > > > > > > > > > var event2:CreateJSEvent; //createjs
> > > > > > > > > > > var event:Event; //native
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Now, within the scope of the class with these import
> > > > > statements,
> > > > > > > > Event
> > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > the top-level function, and CreateJSEvent maps to
> > > > > createjs.Event.
> > > > > > > > This
> > > > > > > > > > > would be really cool, in my opinion. I wish I could use
> > it
> > > in
> > > > > > > > Starling
> > > > > > > > > > > projects to do exactly the same thing with event
> > conflicts:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > import FlashEvent = flash.events.Event;
> > > > > > > > > > > import starling.events.Event;
> > > > > > > > > > > var event:Event; //starling
> > > > > > > > > > > var event2:FlashEvent; //flash
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Again, that would require changes to AS3. Maybe that's
> > not
> > > > > > > > acceptable.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Another option might be to make the name mapping
> > > configurable
> > > > > as
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > compiler
> > > > > > > > > > > argument:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > -map-class=createjs.Event,createjs.CreateJSEvent
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > import createjs.CreateJSEvent;
> > > > > > > > > > > var event:CreateJSEvent; //createjs
> > > > > > > > > > > var event2:Event; //native
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > or:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > -map-class=Event,NativeEvent
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > import createjs.Event;
> > > > > > > > > > > var event:Event; //createjs
> > > > > > > > > > > var event2:NativeEvent; //native
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Very similar, but this would apply to a whole project
> > > instead
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > scope
> > > > > > > > > > > of a single class. The JavaScript output would use the
> > real
> > > > > name
> > > > > > > > > > > (createjs.Event or Event), but the AS3 would use the
> > mapped
> > > > > name
> > > > > > > > > > > (createjs.CreateJSEvent or NativeEvent).
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I suppose, with all of these, IDEs would probably fail
> to
> > > > > > recognize
> > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > > names were mapped and show incorrect errors. I'm
> finding
> > > this
> > > > > > > > stagnant
> > > > > > > > > > AS3
> > > > > > > > > > > IDE landscape frustrating (IDEs have some annoying bugs
> > > with
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > Feathers
> > > > > > > > > > > SDK too). It makes me want to forge ahead without them
> > and
> > > > hope
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > an
> > > > > > > > > > > alternative comes along.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Thoughts? Please feel free to shoot things down for
> being
> > > > crazy
> > > > > > or
> > > > > > > > > > > impossible.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > - Josh
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
