A directive could be a solution.
But I think this is an issue with any static method. If a closure is used
inside a static method, or a function declared inside a static method, it
should not use Language.closure.
FWIW, the Google compile complains about “this” being used in a static method
as well:
[mxmlc] Jul 16, 2017 7:26:08 PM
com.google.javascript.jscomp.LoggerErrorManager println
[mxmlc] WARNING:
/Users/harbs/Documents/ApacheFlex/flex-asjs/examples/flexjs/DebuggingExample/bin/js-debug/org/apache/flex/utils/callLater.js:35:
WARNING - dangerous use of this in static method
org.apache.flex.utils.callLater
[mxmlc] setTimeout(org.apache.flex.utils.Language.closure(makeCalls,
this, 'makeCalls'), 0);
Package level functions should be treated as static methods.
It might not be a bad idea to add a directive to allow developers to avoid
Language.closure calls at will, but I think the “correct” general solution is
to never output Language.closure in static and package level functions.
> On Jul 17, 2017, at 9:16 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> wrote:
>
> I don't see any current way to suppress the Language.closure. Without
> flow-analysis, I'm not sure the compiler can tell. It could guess that
> the identifier is a parameter, but the parameter variable could be
> assigned within the function body.
>
> We could add a new directive like @flexjsisclosure or something like that.
>
> Thoughts?
> -Alex
>
> On 7/16/17, 10:05 AM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I figured out the problem.
>>
>> org.apache.flex.utils.callLater has the following code:
>> setTimeout(makeCalls, 0);
>>
>> That compiles to:
>> setTimeout(org.apache.flex.utils.Language.closure(makeCalls, this,
>> 'makeCalls'), 0);
>>
>> When Language.closure is called, it messes up the scope of the calls
>> variable and subsequent calls to makeCalls step on each other. I believe
>> this is because makeCalls is bound to the package object of the callLater
>> function.
>>
>> Is there any way to prevent rewriting of function calls to
>> Language.closure?
>>
>> If "setTimeout(makeCalls, 0);" is cross-compiled exactly to:
>> "setTimeout(makeCalls, 0);", it works like I’d expect it to.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Harbs
>>
>>> On Jul 16, 2017, at 3:46 PM, Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Interesting to note:
>>>
>>> Adding a number of callLater() calls resulted in only the first one
>>> being called in JS. I did not try as a SWF.
>>
>
