This sounds like a very useful feature, provided not everyone is using source
map enabled tools. I agree with Alex it's worth implementing outside the
compiler for maintenance and future platforms.
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-development.247.n4.nabble.com/FlexJS-Debu
I implemented a "debugger" statement in ActionScript that works similarly
to the JavaScript debugger statement:
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Statements/debugger
In JavaScript, it translates directly. In SWF, the compiler generates
bytecode for a call to flash.
It sounds like an interesting challenge, but I would not want to see
special cases like this in the compiler. I don't understand the need to
extend AS with JS syntax.
In general, if there are different implementations on the various
runtimes, we should invent an API for everyone to use, such as
> > I'm still confused. If you can use flash.system.System.pause() what
custom byte code is needed?
I want to be able to write a "debugger" statement in ActionScript and have
the compiler call flash.system.System.pause() in the generated SWF. Calling
a function in a SWF requires some kind of inst
I'm still confused. If you can use flash.system.System.pause() what
custom byte code is needed?
Are there other JS statements we need to support some day? Being able to
add them to js.swc might be a better plan than having to change the
compiler for each statement.
-Alex
On 7/19/17, 7:37 PM, "
If that's the case we should not so freely use traces in framework itself.
Eventually pass in compilation require flag for each module.
Piotr
-
Apache Flex PMC
piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-development.247.n4.nabble.com/FlexJS-Debugging-p
Hmm, after digging into it a bit more, it appears that optimization does
not remove trace calls. I haven't dumped a release SWF to verify. Maybe
trace() just doesn't do anything in the production player.
Optimization is a post-link process. IOW, it processes ABC code instead
of source code, so
We could consider something similar to COMPILE::JS and COMPILE::SWF where
they default to a value of auto, which the compiler knows to turn into true
or false. COMPILE::DEBUG could also default to a value of auto, and then
the compiler makes it true for a debug build and false for a release build.
Harbs,
It would be great to have it summarized in jira!
Thanks,
Piotr
-
Apache Flex PMC
piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-development.247.n4.nabble.com/FlexJS-Debugging-package-tp63288p63453.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailin
We also need to modify the output for trace in JS to put the goog.DEBUG check
at the very start of the function and to not output the @export tag.
The rest of the debugging functions need to lose the @export tag as well.
Should I put all this in a JIRA?
> On Jul 20, 2017, at 11:16 AM, Harbs wr
Hard code what? For any function in the org.apache.flex.debugging package it
would not output to release SWF?
> On Jul 20, 2017, at 11:00 AM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
> For now, I would just hard code it.
>
> On 7/20/17, 12:55 AM, "Harbs" wrote:
>
>> Cool. So what would you recommend the conventi
For now, I would just hard code it.
On 7/20/17, 12:55 AM, "Harbs" wrote:
>Cool. So what would you recommend the convention to tell the compiler to
>do so? A meta tag? a comment directive? (i.e. @debug)
>
>> On Jul 20, 2017, at 10:51 AM, Alex Harui
>>wrote:
>>
>> I believe there is code that be
Cool. So what would you recommend the convention to tell the compiler to do so?
A meta tag? a comment directive? (i.e. @debug)
> On Jul 20, 2017, at 10:51 AM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
> I believe there is code that becomes part of the optimizer.jar that
> removes the trace statements. It might be p
I believe there is code that becomes part of the optimizer.jar that
removes the trace statements. It might be possible extend that code to
remove other things.
-Alex
On 7/19/17, 11:47 PM, "Harbs" wrote:
>I don’t think there were any responses to this.
>
>As it stands, the debugging functions w
I don’t think there were any responses to this.
As it stands, the debugging functions will exist in release versions of swfs.
Harbs
> On Jul 16, 2017, at 12:07 PM, Harbs wrote:
>
> 1. The debugging functions should disappear in a release build of JS, but I’m
> not sure how to make the same th
Well, as I said, I already have the compiler parsing the real debugger
statement in AS, and emitting the right JS. I just need to generate some
custom bytecode for SWF and then it will work everywhere.
- Josh
On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 7:17 PM, Alex Harui
wrote:
> I think we allow classes to be us
I think we allow classes to be used as a "statement" for dependency
management. CoreClasses.as, for example, has plenty of lines like:
import org.apache.flex.core.IUIBase; IUIBase;
HTH,
-Alex
On 7/19/17, 6:57 PM, "Josh Tynjala" wrote:
>Yes, I'm changing the compiler. The debugger statemen
Yes, I'm changing the compiler. The debugger statement is not a function.
It works like this:
debugger;
I think that flash.system.System.pause() will work too, and it's documented:
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/FlashPlatform/reference/actionscript/3/flash/system/System.html#pause()
- Josh
On Wed
Are you changing the compiler? I thought you could just add:
function debugger{};
to missing.js so it results in:
public class debugger {};
and
package flash.debugger {
native function enterDebugger():void;
}
to one of our swcs? Although I have to say I'm a bit uncomfortable about
ad
I'm working on adding support for the debugger statement to the compiler
(FLEX-35343). I can successfully emit the debugger statement in the
generated JS so far.
I'm not yet sure if I can make it work on the SWF side. I figured out where
I can generate bytecode instructions in ABCGeneratingReducer
"var self = this;” is added to every method that has inner/local
functions. Use of "this" in local functions is changed to use "self" in
order to get AS scoping in JS. I think we currently generate a self=this
even if the local functions don't need it. Someday the compiler will be
smarter about
The places that I checked look good.
Side question: Despite the fact that “this” is no longer used in the callLater
function, I noticed that the compiler is inserting "var self = this;” at the
start of the function.
I don’t think it causes any harm, but it does cause a Google compiler warning
I’m not going to claim I understand what you just wrote. ;-)
I’ll see if I can understand the output…
Thanks.
> On Jul 17, 2017, at 10:33 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
> Thinking about it more, I think a parameter of type Function never needs
> to be wrapped. It would get wrapped on any assignment
Thinking about it more, I think a parameter of type Function never needs
to be wrapped. It would get wrapped on any assignment in the function
body. I just pushed changes to reflect that.
-Alex
On 7/16/17, 11:41 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>Seems reasonable to add a check to see if the function b
Seems reasonable to add a check to see if the function body is for a
static method.
-Alex
On 7/16/17, 11:25 PM, "Harbs" wrote:
>A directive could be a solution.
>
>But I think this is an issue with any static method. If a closure is used
>inside a static method, or a function declared inside a
A directive could be a solution.
But I think this is an issue with any static method. If a closure is used
inside a static method, or a function declared inside a static method, it
should not use Language.closure.
FWIW, the Google compile complains about “this” being used in a static method
as
I don't see any current way to suppress the Language.closure. Without
flow-analysis, I'm not sure the compiler can tell. It could guess that
the identifier is a parameter, but the parameter variable could be
assigned within the function body.
We could add a new directive like @flexjsisclosure or
I figured out the problem.
org.apache.flex.utils.callLater has the following code:
setTimeout(makeCalls, 0);
That compiles to:
setTimeout(org.apache.flex.utils.Language.closure(makeCalls, this,
'makeCalls'), 0);
When Language.closure is called, it messes up the scope of the calls variable
and
I don't have free cycle right now, but I have some plan to look into compiler
and learn things.
Jira need to be created to track this issue. Till it's failing we should
comment it out.
Piotr
-
Apache Flex PMC
piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-de
That’s beyond me. One day maybe I’ll be up to fiddling with the compiler like
that, but I’m not there yet…
I’d think nothing needs to be done on the SWF side (unless we need to support
debugger; in client code unwrapped). Right now, here’s what I have:
COMPILE::SWF
{
If it were a variable or function, it could be defined somewhere like that.
It's a statement, though, so it needs to be added to where Falcon creates
the AST from the ActionScript code. Then, it also needs to emit the
statement as JS in FalconJX. On the SWF side, it should be translated to
appropri
What needs to be modified? Does it need to be added to NativeJSType enums?
Somewhere else?
I’m really not clear on when things to be added to that and when they need to
be in typedefs.
> On Jul 16, 2017, at 6:51 PM, Harbs wrote:
>
>> The compiler needs to be modified to support the debugger s
I added flash.debugger.enterDebugger(); on the SWF side. I have not yet tested
it, but it’s *supposed* to work…
> On Jul 16, 2017, at 6:34 PM, Josh Tynjala wrote:
>
> The compiler needs to be modified to support the debugger statement.
>
> Ideally, it would also force Flash to pause in the deb
Because it’s not being imported by CoreClasses. What is making Maven import it?
> On Jul 16, 2017, at 6:25 PM, piotrz wrote:
>
> Let's create jira for that. I'm surprise that Ant build is not complaining
> about that. Why?
>
> Piotr
>
>
>
> -
> Apache Flex PMC
> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.co
Let's create jira for that. I'm surprise that Ant build is not complaining
about that. Why?
Piotr
-
Apache Flex PMC
piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-development.247.n4.nabble.com/FlexJS-Debugging-package-tp63288p63306.html
Sent from the Apa
The compiler needs to be modified to support the debugger statement.
Ideally, it would also force Flash to pause in the debugger.
- Josh
On Jul 16, 2017 2:07 AM, "Harbs" wrote:
I just added a debugging package to FlexJS. There are two things I don’t
know how to do:
1. The debugging functions
I just added an example project (maybe it should have gone into manual tests?).
Interesting to note:
Adding a number of callLater() calls resulted in only the first one being
called in JS. I did not try as a SWF.
> On Jul 16, 2017, at 12:24 PM, piotrz wrote:
>
> Thank you! :) And I really lik
That import should have been commented out in CoreClasses and it should not be
compiled.
Does Maven work differently?
> On Jul 16, 2017, at 3:02 PM, piotrz wrote:
>
> Harbs,
>
> I just tried compile FlexJS by Maven and got following error in core:
>
> conditionalBreak.as(43): col: 17 Access
Harbs,
I just tried compile FlexJS by Maven and got following error in core:
conditionalBreak.as(43): col: 17 Access of possibly undefined property
debugger.
debugger;
^
Piotr
-
Apache Flex PMC
piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com
--
View this message in context:
ht
Thank you! :) And I really like the idea :)
Piotr
-
Apache Flex PMC
piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-development.247.n4.nabble.com/FlexJS-Debugging-package-tp63288p63292.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at Nab
Yes. Will do when I’m done.
> On Jul 16, 2017, at 12:18 PM, piotrz wrote:
>
> Harbs,
>
> It would be great if you could creat Example project which demonstrate how
> to use those functions.
> Maybe additionally confluence page.
>
> Thanks,
> Piotr
>
>
>
> -
> Apache Flex PMC
> piotrza
Harbs,
It would be great if you could creat Example project which demonstrate how
to use those functions.
Maybe additionally confluence page.
Thanks,
Piotr
-
Apache Flex PMC
piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-development.247.n4.nabble.com/F
42 matches
Mail list logo
