"Full" AS to JS cross-compilation is well within our reach, apart from E4X, which is entirely absent from all browsers except old Firefox builds. If you look at the Wiki, I have made a table of most of the language features of AS and indicated which solutions for the disparities are possible. So far, when looking at JS + 'goog', I don't see any actual show stoppers. There might be some 'nasty' workarounds needed, but we can hide those from the user/developer ;-)
The real challenge is the frameworks on both ends (Flex SDK and "FlexJS"). I'm leaning towards the 'long' solution, where we try to support as much of the Flex SDK on the JS side as possible, again using 'goog'. Having the AS - JS compilation in FalconJx 'nearly 100%' language feature complete (and very extensible) makes it possible to use whatever framework we want on either side. EdB On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > > On 12/27/12 5:33 AM, "Erik de Bruin" <e...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote: > >> >> I'm not sure how your solution provides for this? Mine doesn't either, >> mind you, but I gave up perfection for simplicity very early in this >> thread ;-) >> > +1 on simplicity vs perfection. > > IMO, If you take on full AS to JS cross-compilation, it is a very difficult > task full of these edge cases. But I want to (at least at first) only > cross-compile a subset of AS to JS. I am hopeful there is a subset that is > straight forward to cross-compile that is sufficient enough for folks to > build enterprise class apps. We would add warnings/errors to the compiler > to catch the edge cases like untyped or (* typed) optional params. > > I think I recall that for..in iteration of classes is also an issue. Seems > like we could live without that or require that you provide a filter > function for the cases where you need it. > > -- > Alex Harui > Flex SDK Team > Adobe Systems, Inc. > http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui > -- Ix Multimedia Software Jan Luykenstraat 27 3521 VB Utrecht T. 06-51952295 I. www.ixsoftware.nl
