+1. Bonus points for making a tag and/or branch before deleting. -Alex
On 10/6/16, 3:02 PM, "Josh Tynjala" <joshtynj...@gmail.com> wrote: >Makes sense to me. I say we simply delete it. No need to transfer to >another folder. It'll still be in the repository's history. > >- Josh > >On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Carlos Rovira ><carlos.rov...@codeoscopic.com >> wrote: > >> I want to propose the same. I something was an experiment and is no more >> developed. I think it should go to some folder that make people avoid >> confusion about what code is valid and what is left behind. >> >> 2016-10-06 23:12 GMT+02:00 Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de>: >> >> > I stumble over tons of VF2JS classes and think it would be better to >>move >> > stuf like that to some sort of attic. What do you think? >> > >> > >> > Chris >> > >> > ________________________________ >> > Von: Josh Tynjala <joshtynj...@gmail.com> >> > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 6. Oktober 2016 17:13:49 >> > An: dev@flex.apache.org >> > Betreff: Re: [FALCONJX] Combining SWF and JS compilers (was Re: AW: >> > [FalconJX][FlexJS] COMPJSC and Build order) >> > >> > JSC is meant to be purely an ActionScript to JavaScript transpiler >> without >> > any frameworks. By default, it doesn't export an HTML file, but it >>will >> > optionally support custom HTML templates in 0.8.0. It is exposed >>through >> > the js/bin/asjsc executable, where it loads the >>frameworks/js-config.xml >> > configuration. js-config.xml references js.swc to give ActionScript >> access >> > to browser APIs. >> > >> > NODE generates an index.js that bootstraps things for Node.js. It is >> > exposed through the js/bin/asnodec executable, which it loads the >> > frameworks/node-config.xml configuration. In addition to js.swc, >> > node-config.xml references node.swc to give ActionScript access to >> Node.js >> > APIs. >> > >> > As far as I know, AMD and VF2JS are no longer maintained. I assume AMD >> > tried to output AMD modules instead of goog modules. I remember Alex >>or >> > someone mentioning that VF2JS had something to do with the original >>Flex >> > framework, but I don't know the details. >> > >> > - Josh >> > >> > On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 12:10 AM, Christofer Dutz < >> > christofer.d...@c-ware.de> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > Hi Alex, >> > > >> > > >> > > yesterday I stumbled over this flexjs-dual output type while looking >> for >> > > the correct settings to buid a pure JS app. Would it be possible for >> you >> > > guys to give a short summary of what the different output types >> actually >> > > are? The enum doesn't contain any documentation on this and I guess >> this >> > > would be really helpful. >> > > >> > > >> > > So far I see these output types: >> > > >> > > AMD >> > > FLEXJS >> > > GOOG >> > > VF2JS >> > > FLEXJS_DUAL >> > > JSC >> > > NODE >> > > >> > > And I guess I only used no value and FLEXJS >> > > >> > > >> > > Chris >> > > >> > > ________________________________ >> > > Von: Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> >> > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 6. Oktober 2016 07:45:48 >> > > An: dev@flex.apache.org >> > > Betreff: [FALCONJX] Combining SWF and JS compilers (was Re: AW: >> > > [FalconJX][FlexJS] COMPJSC and Build order) >> > > >> > > Fred Thomas did some work in this area about a year ago. In the >> > > flex-oem-compiler module that FB (and maybe other IDEs) use to talk >>to >> > the >> > > compiler, he added a FLEXJS_DUAL -js-output-type. Not sure how >>well it >> > > works. >> > > >> > > Thinking about this some more we'd have to have the same >>configuration >> > > options available to both compilers which might be a bit strange. >>Or >> > > maybe we can convince the compilers to not complain about unknown >> config >> > > parameters. >> > > >> > > We'd have to decide on how to reset the library-path for each >>compile. >> > > The JS compile might use different SWCs than the SWF compile. >> > > >> > > We'd have to select a few conditional compile options that would be >> > > different for each compiler. For example, COMPILE::SWF would be >>true >> for >> > > SWF compiling and false for JS compiling and vice versa, and maybe >> > finding >> > > those params on the command-line would have no effect since they >>would >> be >> > > dictated by the compiler. >> > > >> > > Thoughts? >> > > -Alex >> > > >> > > On 10/2/16, 1:45 PM, "Josh Tynjala" <joshtynj...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > >> > > >That would be ideal! >> > > > >> > > >- Josh >> > > > >> > > >On Oct 1, 2016 10:47 PM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: >> > > > >> > > >> One more thought on this: now that COMPJSC can more or less >>build >> its >> > > >>own >> > > >> output instead of relying on COMPC to package its pile of .js >>files, >> > it >> > > >> might be worth experimenting with combining Falcon and FalconJX >>so >> > COMPC >> > > >> can produce a SWC or a SWC with JS files based on some >>configuration >> > > >> parameter. Then there would only be one compiler that produces >>SWFs >> > or >> > > >>JS >> > > >> based on some -output-type flag. >> > > >> >> > > >> Thoughts? >> > > >> -Alex >> > > >> >> > > >> On 10/1/16, 10:18 PM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: >> > > >> >> > > >> >Hi Chris, >> > > >> > >> > > >> >When I read this, I realized I already pushed the changes when I >> > pushed >> > > >> >some other changes yesterday. If the Maven build didn't blow >>up, >> it >> > is >> > > >> >probably because it is using its own compile-xx-config.xml >>files so >> > is >> > > >> >still generating a pile of .js files and packaging them up on >>the >> SWF >> > > >> >COMPC run. >> > > >> > >> > > >> >-Alex >> > > >> > >> > > >> >On 10/1/16, 6:10 AM, "Christofer Dutz" >><christofer.d...@c-ware.de> >> > > >>wrote: >> > > >> > >> > > >> >>Hi Alex, >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >>so I guess ideally this change should be done on a feature >>branch, >> > so >> > > >>I >> > > >> >>can sort out the Maven issues and we'll merge that back as >>soon as >> > > >>all is >> > > >> >>working. I would like to ask you to create a >> > > >>"feature-autobuild/"-branch >> > > >> >>for that. Just give me a short note what branch the stuff is in >> and >> > > >>I'll >> > > >> >>try to sort out the Maven issues. >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >>Chris >> > > >> > >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Carlos Rovira >> Director General >> M: +34 607 22 60 05 >> http://www.codeoscopic.com >> http://www.avant2.es >> >> >> Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario y puede contener >> información privilegiada o confidencial. Si ha recibido este mensaje por >> error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma >>vía y >> proceda a su destrucción. >> >> De la vigente Ley Orgánica de Protección de Datos (15/1999), le >>comunicamos >> que sus datos forman parte de un fichero cuyo responsable es CODEOSCOPIC >> S.A. La finalidad de dicho tratamiento es facilitar la prestación del >> servicio o información solicitados, teniendo usted derecho de acceso, >> rectificación, cancelación y oposición de sus datos dirigiéndose a >>nuestras >> oficinas c/ Paseo de la Habana 9-11, 28036, Madrid con la documentación >> necesaria. >>
