Never mind, I think I don't need to do this output. It looks like I can
simply use constructor.superClass in js and go recursive. Please ignore.
On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Greg Dove <greg.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Alex this might be a question more for you, unless others are familiar
> with the topic.
>
> I am currently doing a bit more on reflection. Instead of outputting the
> fully resolved ancestral definition for each class, which would mean a lot
> of duplicated output across the inheritance chain, I assumed it would be
> best to resolve this at runtime (with caching) in the TypeDefinitions. So
> each TypeDefinition lookup would check its ancestors and add to its local
> collection of instance based members if they weren't already 'declaredBy'
> again (an override), and I envisaged caching the fully resolved
> TypeDefinition. This would get to a similar result to flash native
> describeType.
>
> so I am adding inheritsFrom into the output like so:
>
> MyInitialView.prototype.FLEXJS_REFLECTION_INFO = function () {
> return {
> inheritsFrom: function () {
> return [ 'org.apache.flex.core.View', 'org.apache.flex.core.ViewBase',
> 'org.apache.flex.core.ContainerBase', 'org.apache.flex.core.UIBase',
> 'org.apache.flex.core.HTMLElementWrapper', 'flash.display.Sprite',
> 'flash.display.DisplayObjectContainer', 'flash.display.InteractiveObject',
> 'flash.display.DisplayObject', 'flash.events.EventDispatcher', 'Object' ]
> ;
> },
>
> But it seems that the framework swc library only provides the flash
> version of the inheritance chain for this, because jx sees the
> flash.display.* classes in the loaded typedefinitions. Is there any way the
> compiler can load the definitions that were used when the js part of the
> swc was compiled for jx? I suspect not at the moment, but I'm just checking
> that I am not missing something obvious.....
>
>
>
