On 9/17/15, 9:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <webdoubl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I’m interested to see what you put in GCL.swc. I created a few stubs >>for >> the calls I needed and also changed the compiler so it will allow >> goog.events.fireListener to be a class called goog.events with a >> fireListener member and not fail by assuming goog.events was a package >>and >> not finding the fireListener class. > >After having cherrypicked your fix, I added a goog.events class and added >a static getter / setter and t made the trick ! So I assume that takes care of the package-level getter/setter issue right? There really shouldn’t need to be package level getters and setters if we can create classes like goog.events, which IMO, better mirrors what is actually happening in JS (where goog and goog.events are actually objects). Do you still have the missing goog.require problem? > >I committed GCL, read the commit comments and come back to me if you need >more details. Yes, I’m merging in your changes right now. I’m wondering why you decided to make such a “complete” GCL.swc. I’m tempted to make a much smaller one that just has the few classes we need, then we don’t have such a huge pile of custom code to maintain. I made my own stubs last night and it was only four small files so far. -Alex
