Hi Jim, Do you get some kind of error when you do this? Are you using 0.8.0 or the nightly?
I don’t think hasOwnProperty is something I personally use, so I wouldn’t be too surprised if there are issues there. (FWIW, you should be able to use if(resourceXML.@collapsible.length()) as a workaround.) Thanks, Harbs > On Jul 30, 2017, at 9:56 PM, Jim Norris <jim.nor...@e-work.com> wrote: > > This may be for Harbs as I think he did a lot of the work for XML. > > > > I am working on some existing Flex code and trying to convert portions of it > to FlexJS. As part of the application it loads a lot of XML files and uses > E4X to parse them. I was able to get this working quickly in swf format, so > that was awesome! > > > > However, I am having a problem with the hasOwnProperty method. It works > fine running in swf format, but when I export to HTML/JS the Javascript > bombs on the hasOwnProperty method calls. If I remove them the code > executes as it should. > > > > I checked here > (https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLEX/E4X+Observations) and it > seems like they should be working but I wanted to check if I am doing > something I should not. > > > > > > Typically these checks look like this in AS: > > > > if (resourceXML.hasOwnProperty("@collapsible") == true){ > > globalCollapsible = toBoolean(resourceXML.@collapsible); > > }else{ > > _globalCollapsible = false; > > } > > > > And look like this in the JS (the last alert I message I see is the > 'checking global property'): > > > > alert('TextViewer checking global property'); > > if (resourceXML.hasOwnProperty("@collapsible") == true) { > > alert('TextViewer.init found global property'); > > this._globalCollapsible = > this.toBoolean(resourceXML.attribute('collapsible')); > > } else { > > alert('TextViewer.init global property not found'); > > this._globalCollapsible = false; > > } > > > > > > I have a ton of these types of checks in my code so any insight you may have > into either 1) what is wrong, or 2) what I should do instead would be a lot > of help. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jim >
