On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Gordon Smith <gosm...@adobe.com> wrote:
> > Falcon is a new version of the Actionscript compiler. > > Falcon is a reimplementation of mxmlc and compc. The AS support is very > good. (It will ship as FB 4.7.) The MXML support is incomplete but Falcon > can compile the framework test file Checkinapp.mxml. > > > Does it support mxml as well? Or would that be a separate top level > project? > > See above. > > > What do we call the compiler that is currently inside trunk? > > I call it "the legacy compiler". > > > If falcon gets a new top level project, shouldnt the current compiler > get its own top level project? > > I don't have an opinion on that. I hope the old compiler dies as soon as > possible. > > > Does Falcon work with exisiting flex sdk? > > It 's intended to eventually, but it's not yet ready to compile and run > all SDK SWCs and tests yet. > > > If I create new components inside incubator/flex/SDK/trunk/, should I > worry about who Falcon will work with it? How would I set up my project in > that case? > > Unless you want to contribute to Falcon, you shouldn't worry about it. At > some point, if it becomes a suitable replacement for the legacy compiler, > we will switch over and everything should just work the same. > > > Should I have copies of my new components in both > incubator/flex/SDK/trunk/ and incubator/flex/Falcon/trunk/ to run both > Mustella tests and Falcon's tests? > > No; incubator/flex/Falcon/trunk will be only for Falcon's Java code. No > framework components will live there. > > > Does Falcon share any code with Falcon JS? > > Yes, it shares a front end (lexer/parser/symbol table). FalconJS and > Falcon have different back ends (code generators). FalconJS is not ready > for donation. > > > If yes, how might we want to change the repo structure if/when FalconJS > is contributed to Apache Flex? > > We can figure that out when FalconJS is ready, but I think making it a > sibling of Falcon would be best. It could share Falcon's front end just by > putting Falcon's JAR on its classpath. > > - Gordon > > Thanks Gordon! >From what I read, it looks like Falcon is a new feature that will be added to Apache Flex. I believe it should be under /flex/trunk/modules/falcon. And since it might be highly unstable, we should probably create a 'falcon' branch to do this in. Especially since you want to replace /flex/trunk/modules/asc and /flex/trunk/modules/compile with the falcon compiler. I think this structure follows what we have been discussing in the branching strategy threads. Elsewhere, you said: If Flex has independent subprojects like SDK, Falcon, TLF, etc., how would > we tie them all together to do testing? With environment variables that say > "use this branch of the SDK, this branch of Falcon, this branch of TLF, > etc."? > Keeping it under /flex/trunk/modules/falcon would solve this problem too, right? Eventually we should throwaway the /flex/trunk/modules/asc/ (legacy compiler) and rename falcon to asc as well. As I see it, Falcon is a codename for a new version of the compiler. We are mixing functional names like "asc" and "compiler" with codenames like "falcon". What happens when we want to build a new version of actionscript compiler after falcon? We dont want to have that existing alongside with another codename as well. Thanks, Om
