On 5/8/16, 4:34 PM, "Christofer Dutz" wrote:
>
>Well I agree that it would be good to share instances of things, but not
>configuration. Especially not sharing stuff between different instances
>of different compilers. Just as an example: MXMLJSC sets a different
>backend then COMPJSC does ...
___
Von: Alex Harui
Gesendet: Sonntag, 8. Mai 2016 16:15:57
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: AW: AW: [FLEXJS] Probably found the reason for some of my problems
...
On 5/8/16, 5:21 AM, "Christofer Dutz" wrote:
>
>Hi Alex,
>
>well actually the Ant build doesn&
On 5/8/16, 5:21 AM, "Christofer Dutz" wrote:
>
>Hi Alex,
>
>well actually the Ant build doesn't destroy the compiler, but the entire
>VM. To me it seems that for every compilation and every Unit test a new
>VM is forked. This is extremely expensive and time consuming. If you have
>a look at the
Forgot to respond to the "Just curious, what is the advantage of creating
instances of every tool in the group?"
In the FlexToolApi there is a mechanism that auto-detects Tool-Groups (in
flexJS there is the "Falcon" tool group and the "FlexJS" tool group)
In order to build an index of the tools a
Hi Alex,
well actually the Ant build doesn't destroy the compiler, but the entire VM. To
me it seems that for every compilation and every Unit test a new VM is forked.
This is extremely expensive and time consuming. If you have a look at the Flex
Jenkins and compare the build time of Falcon wi
