Quoting Frank Wienberg <fr...@jangaroo.net>:
Hi Dan,
just to get things straight, I am not working on a different
implementation, but discussion with Erik and Mike trying to find the
optimal JavaScript output format. In my current experiments, I am trying an
approach without the "goog" library, which does not mean you cannot use the
Google Closure Compiler to optimize the output. For loading and linking
classes, I use RequireJS, which is an implementation of the AMD module
format like "goog", but in contrast, it only does that and not a bagful of
other things. I think that concentrating on one thing at a time
(loading/linking vs. code optimization) helps clarify the approach and
minimizes dependencies of design decisions.
What Mike builds fits my view on how to generate JS code like a glove.
Mike, your latest refactoring makes perfectly sense, we can put the "goog"
solution in one subclass and the RequireJS solution in another and compare
the results!
Yes, this is exactly what I was designing for. I'm a component/tool
developer are heart, my mind sees the world as a bunch of lego pieces
that will fit together if assembled with the right interfaces. ;-)
The ASBlockWalker has some serious refactor ahead, but I want to get
as many unit tests in before I go ripping it a part and making
abstract super classes with expression and statement hooks.
Mike
Greetings
-Frank-
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Daniel Wasilewski
<devudes...@gmail.com>wrote:
And don't quite understand the status. Is it like we have 3 different
people working on their own/favourite implementation at the same time?
--
Michael Schmalle - Teoti Graphix, LLC
http://www.teotigraphix.com
http://blog.teotigraphix.com
