One thing to keep in mind with stripping out trace() calls is that some
developers expect any modifications to variables that happen inside the
arguments to remain. I remember a while back someone at Adobe mentioning
that people complained when something like this was completely stripped out:
trace(doSomething++);
Because they expected this part to remain:
doSomething++;
- Josh
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 12:24 AM, Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> My bad. It does in fact compile down to this:
>
> function uM(a){a=Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments,0)}w('org.
> apache.flex.utils.Language.trace',uM);
>
> So trace does not actually do anything. Great! :-)
>
> However, it’s still being called by the client code. (It just does
> nothing.) Not super important, but it would be nice if at some point we can
> figure out if there’s a way to strip out the calls completely.
>
> > On Jul 12, 2017, at 10:07 AM, Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Oof. I think I’m still waking up. ;-)
> >
> > I did not realize what I was looking at with the goog.DEBUG. My
> recollection is that trace statements are still being used in the release,
> but I’ll double check that.
> >
> >> On Jul 12, 2017, at 9:56 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Well, the goal of using goog.DEBUG in Language.as trace() was to
> convince
> >> GCC to eliminate trace(). I haven't checked whether it is working or
> not.
> >> Requiring everyone to use goog.DEBUG around trace statements sounds like
> >> a pain. Probably better to teach the publisher to remove it if GCC
> can't
> >> be taught to do it. We visit almost every line of the JS output in the
> >> publishers right now.
> >>
> >> My 2 cents,
> >> -Alex
> >>
> >> On 7/11/17, 11:47 PM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>> On Jul 12, 2017, at 8:20 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Again, though, I think this optimization isn't urgent.
> >>>
> >>> I completely agree. That’s why I have not been bringing this up despite
> >>> it being on my mind. When the discussion came up, I couldn’t help but
> >>> join. ;-)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> goog.DEBUG is already being used in Language.as.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks! I hadn’t noticed. I was missing an import of of goog.DEBUG in
> >>> COMPILE::JS I’m guessing the imports of goog.bind and goog.global was
> >>> enough to make goog.DEBUG visible to the compiler in Language.as.
> >>>
> >>> Once we’re on this topic, there’s something that I had wanted to bring
> up
> >>> for a long time: I think trace statements should disappear in the
> release
> >>> JS build. Should we put all the JS trace code inside an if(goog.DEBUG)
> >>> block?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Harbs
> >>
> >
>
>
