On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 6:42 PM, Michael Schmalle <apa...@teotigraphix.com>wrote:
> For FalconJS this process is totally bound to SWF format. > > This was my point. For any developer to fix bugs here they have to know > the SWF format. Which I don't. > > This is why I propsed another solution using pure AST like Jangaroo does. > > I am not skilled enough to understand the trade offs currently. But I am > going to try and see if I can create the same JS code using a different > algorithm. > I guess the trade off is that the AST approach leads to a different packaging format. For Jangaroo, we use JARs that contain the generated JS code as well as generated AS "API stubs" (under META-INF/joo-api), that is the AS code is reduced to its API, using the "native" keyword. This allows to compile against other modules without having their source code. However, the consequence is that you need a different classpath and custom build tools: we created a Maven plugin that provides a custom packaging type currently called "jangaroo" that outputs a JAR in the format described above. When the output format is SWC/SWF, you more closely resemble Flash/Flex. But honestly, unless we transform ActionScript byte code into JavaScript (or interpret it in JavaScript like in Gordon's approach), we cannot use any "binary" modules, anyway, but instead all modules have to be recompiled for use with FalconJS, or even worse you need the complete source code for the whole project, which would increase build time and hinder real modular development as well as closed source modules--quite a show stopper for an Enterprise tool! -Frank-
