Yeah I had considered the same thing - simply Adding concrete references in
the TestClasses.as. It's a simple enough 'fix, just slightly less 'elegant'
(which is fine).
I didn't actually add those formatting calls that ultimately added to
usedNames from the footer. I believe I just fixed the names
Hi Greg and Alex,
thanks for helping out!
>I did not see the 'value' is undefined error...
Probably it's not needed but to avoid confusion I've created a small test
case [1].
I've also added the JS output of the related Enum class and some screenshots
of the browser output to the repo. Maybe this
Hi,
probably I do something wrong but it seems to me that even simple basic
binding doesn't work.
I've tested it with 0.6.0, 0.7.0 and the the nightly build.
Could somebody confirm this or point me to the right direction?
Many thanks,
Olaf
[1] https://gist.github.com/ok-at-github/4dc354f7e888bf63
Always the same, just milliseconds after submitting my question the PAYG
comes into to my mind.
Will add the binding bead...
Thanks,
Olaf
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-development.247.n4.nabble.com/FlexJS-Simple-Binding-doesn-t-work-tp55491p55492.html
Sent from the Ap
I modified the GenericTest and pushed changes. See the comments in
CoreTester about the pattern for force-linking.
On 9/30/16, 12:24 AM, "Greg Dove" wrote:
>I did have another somewhat related thought I can't check it now, but
>if GCC removes 'dead code' (methods or properties not explicitl
Hmm, I notice that the binding doesn't work if I put it all into one file
[1].
If I outsource the view and do it the same way as it is demonstrated within
the "DataBindingExample" it works.
Does this makes sense or do I something wrong?
Thanks,
Olaf
[1] https://gist.github.com/ok-at-github/4dc354
On 9/30/16, 8:34 AM, "OK" wrote:
>Hmm, I notice that the binding doesn't work if I put it all into one file
>[1].
>If I outsource the view and do it the same way as it is demonstrated
>within
>the "DataBindingExample" it works.
>Does this makes sense or do I something wrong?
You might need to
Ok so it turned out to have been a problem I had encountered several times now
:-(
it turned out the META-INF directory was automatically ignored by GIT because
it was in the Gitignore file ... unfortunately you can't really see that in the
IDE. I downloaded the jars and looked into them and n
Alex Harui wrote
> You might need to use ApplicationDataBinding.
That's it, thanks Alex!
>BTW, feel free to get started on a new component set that bakes in
>binding
I decided to first finish my PureMVC demo cause of the lack of public FlexJS
demos out there.
Maybe this helps to get more people
On 9/29/16, 11:36 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>
>Now that I got rid of the circularity in Ibead/Istrand I am also getting a
>ton of warnings that say:
>
> WARNING - incomplete alias created for namespace goog
I think is is being caused by the change from @export to @expose [1]
What was the scenar
Alex, @export did not work for me on any static members. You cannot reflect
into the field names unless you use @expose.
You can double check this via generictests reflection tests.
-Greg
[sent from my phone]
On 1/10/2016 5:21 AM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>
>
> On 9/29/16, 11:36 PM, "Alex Harui" w
Hi Chris,
don't worry, I love help with this. Hope I could have some time to make
more... :)
regarding this problem, finally I get a successful build of the project,
really cool, congrats! :)
But there's a final problem. Now that project is generated, as I try to
build it with: mvn clean install
I read that link, it's very helpful. It seems that this is going to be a
challenge. I suggest you revert that as you suggested.
Josh discovered this originally for static accessors I think (the fact that
@export does not prevent renaming on statics and @expose was the only other
option that seemed
IMO, there are two separate issues.
I think Josh found that static accessors couldn't be accessed via normal
code "ClassName.propertyName". I ran into this for instance accessors as
well. The instance accessors are defined in a Object.defineProperty call
separate from the usual ClassName.prototy
Thanks for the explanation!
I guess I missed the distinction with the accessors, but I had remembered
the 'solution' and just assumed it was appropriate when it 'worked' for
static variables and methods (not realizing the other consequences).
In any case it appears that @export does not prevent re
Hi Carlos,
Yeah unfortunately the build seems to be broken at the moment.
I hope the changes committed after I fixed the archetypes will be fixed soon.
At least the archetype seems to work now.
Chris
Von meinem Samsung Galaxy Smartphone gesendet.
Ursprüngliche Nachricht
V
Change GoogDocEmitter got rid of the warnings but broke GenericTests for
now.
I will next try --generate-exports, but I'm thinking we want to allow
control at the file and property/method level.
Thoughts?
-Alex
On 9/30/16, 12:27 PM, "Greg Dove" wrote:
>Thanks for the explanation!
>I guess I mi
Hi guys,
so it seems I have managed to fix the Maven Archetype, but now the build is
broken again and it stops at the ChartsExample again. Probably it will take
some time for someone to notice this, as the external build server will not
detect this.
As the external Build server doesn't seem
18 matches
Mail list logo
