> 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).
Yes, it does, thank !
Another thing is the legacy compiler allows to have getter / setter at package
level, not Falcon.
> Do you still have the missing goog.require problem?
Yes but I will fix that, the compiler.clients.* used directly does not create
the issue.
> Yes, I’m merging in your changes right now.
Ok, just take note that I kept only Application in basic-manifest.xml, removed
the -source-path option for the only purpose of being focussed on compiling
only that class and its components, doing so, I wasn't bother by any other
compilation issues of the classes I hadn't been converted yet.
> 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.
My dream would have been that the EXTERNC compiles all the GCL, it was far to
be able to do it, at the point that instead of trying to improve it, I took
what it has generated and used it in a new GCL project, so, not sure we need
all the GCL JS sources I committed, not sure either, at the end, I added more
AS classes than what I need, could be though...
Btw, Josh started to build a tool to cross compile typescripts extern libraries
to .swc, not sure how much progress he did on it though but it would be awesome
for other libs because the number of them is impressive.
Frédéric THOMAS
> From: aha...@adobe.com
> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [FlexJS] Framework using externs (was: Setup Error)
> Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 16:43:52 +0000
>
>
> 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
>
