On Tuesday, August 14, 2012, Gordon Smith wrote: > Hi, Justin. > > To me that sounds like a kludge with little benefit and presumably worse > performance than either compiler by itself. I take it that you are unhappy > with the decision to compile MXML directly to ABC, for maximum performance, > if it means losing -keep? If so, you could work on a alternate compilation > path for MXML in Falcon that involved either real or fake (i.e., not > actually compiled) AS. What is the main problem that you use -keep to > solve? Perhaps Falcon's option that displays MXML syntax trees could be > another solution for you. > > - Gordon > > Sent from my iPad > > On Aug 14, 2012, at 6:26 PM, "Justin Mclean" > <jus...@classsoftware.com<javascript:;>> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > >> Falcon right now is an ActionScript compiler with limited MXML support, > so > >> right now you can't simply change the old compiler by the new one. > > > > Probably some reason to why we cant do this but couldn't we use the > current compiler to turn MXML into AS (-keep of top of head) and then use > Falcon to compile that AS? > > > > Justin >
I think Justin's looking for a stop gap solution for compiling MXML with Falcon. At least that's what I read from it. -omar
