Re: ABC -> JS

On 12/6/12 1:57 PM, Frank Wienberg wrote: I like that idea. But still not all polyfills simulate the intended semantics 100%. The question remains that when we know certain semantics can't be done in a certain browser (like get / set on non-DOM-objects in IE8), should we refrain from using it and

Re: ABC -> JS

On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 5:05 PM, Kevin Newman wrote: > Here's another whole bunch of polyfills for ES5: > http://www.calormen.com/**polyfill/#polyfill > > So the idea wouldn't be to integrate these polyfills, as much as target > ES5 directly without worr

Re: ABC -> JS

Here's another whole bunch of polyfills for ES5: http://www.calormen.com/polyfill/#polyfill So the idea wouldn't be to integrate these polyfills, as much as target ES5 directly without worrying too much about IE8 - except to keep in mind the edge cases of the available polyfills. It should be p

Re: ABC -> JS

Maybe it's worth looking at a polyfill for defineProperties in IE8: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Object/defineProperties https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Object/keys I'm not sure how complete that is thou

Re: ABC -> JS

On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 11:39 PM, Kevin Newman wrote: > Object.create has other useful features too (that can't be polyfilled > unfortunately) - it has a way to set properties enumerable, configurable, > and writable and to define getters and setters. Having a mode to output to > that might be pre

Re: ABC -> JS

That's almost exactly the polyfill for Object.create (except with some extra book keeping): https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Object/create |if| |(!Object.create) {| |||Object.create = ||function| |(o) {| |||if| |(arguments.length > 1) {| |||throw| |new

RE: ABC -> JS

e- From: Michael Schmalle [mailto:apa...@teotigraphix.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 11:41 AM To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: RE: ABC -> JS YES! I knew it. Sorry for the expletives but, last night mulling over the code again I came to this exact conclusion. I figured t

Re: ABC -> JS

Well, going over the actual implementation of base.js things like: goog.inherits = function(childCtor, parentCtor) { /** @constructor */ function tempCtor() {}; tempCtor.prototype = parentCtor.prototype; childCtor.superClass_ = parentCtor.prototype; childCtor.prototype = new tempCtor()

RE: ABC -> JS

JS constructs. > > - Gordon > > -Original Message- > From: Gordon Smith [mailto:gosm...@adobe.com] > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 3:31 PM > To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: RE: ABC -> JS > > I'm trying to stay out of FalconJS, but

Re: ABC -> JS

base.js? it's using 'inherits' instead 'extends' but obviously there must be a substitute. Here is the API. http://closure-library.googlecode.com/svn/docs/closure_goog_base.js.html There is bunch of helpers that actually help you with 'is' and looking at all methods and deep integration with

RE: ABC -> JS

- From: Gordon Smith [mailto:gosm...@adobe.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 3:31 PM To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: RE: ABC -> JS I'm trying to stay out of FalconJS, but I will ask Bernd P about this. - Gordon -Original Message- From: Michael Schmalle [mailto:apa...@teo

RE: ABC -> JS

ng to newcomers. I'd recommend making new structures to represent the higher-level JS constructs. - Gordon -Original Message- From: Gordon Smith [mailto:gosm...@adobe.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 3:31 PM To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: RE: ABC -> JS I&

Re: ABC -> JS

I got some interesting information from the original FalconJS developer. He said he is not using Resig's Simple JS Inheritance scheme and is using Google's base.js instead. I guess I was led astray by one of the comments in the source. I took a look at base.js and don't see the extend() API so I

Re: ABC -> JS

Quoting Frank Wienberg : I hear you Alex, the interest is 110%, the time is another factor. To do this it would take a lot of time. I'm sure others would join in (I hope), so it's really just finding the point to try. I know you understand but a project like that is full language and the Actio

Re: ABC -> JS

On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Michael Schmalle wrote: > > Quoting Alex Harui : > > If you have the time and interest, you are certainly welcome to see if you >> > can implement a different strategy to generate the JS straight from the >> AST. >> > > I hear you Alex, the interest is 110%, the tim

Re: ABC -> JS

Quoting Alex Harui : On 12/4/12 10:54 AM, "Michael Schmalle" wrote: Ok, I get what you are saying but that is like buying a car with no mechanic within 3000 miles. That is true for a significant portion of the AS code as well, not just FalconJS. Carol, Gordon and I didn't write every li

RE: ABC -> JS

I'm trying to stay out of FalconJS, but I will ask Bernd P about this. - Gordon -Original Message- From: Michael Schmalle [mailto:apa...@teotigraphix.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 2:53 PM To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: RE: ABC -> JS The JSEmitter is litte

RE: ABC -> JS

rstand why it is doing anything with Traits. Alex, you might want to ask Bernd P. - Gordon -Original Message- From: Michael Schmalle [mailto:apa...@teotigraphix.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 1:50 PM To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: ABC -> JS Quoting Alex Harui :

RE: ABC -> JS

Interesting. I don't understand why it is doing anything with Traits. Alex, you might want to ask Bernd P. - Gordon -Original Message- From: Michael Schmalle [mailto:apa...@teotigraphix.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 1:50 PM To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re

Re: ABC -> JS

Quoting Alex Harui : On 12/4/12 12:37 PM, "Gordon Smith" wrote: SO I will say to anybody, in the current state of the FalconJS compiler, you NEED to know opcdes to be able to fix anything. I don't know much about FalconJS but I would be very surprised if this is true. Can you show me one

Re: ABC -> JS

On 12/4/12 12:37 PM, "Gordon Smith" wrote: >> SO I will say to anybody, in the current state of the FalconJS compiler, you >> NEED to know opcdes to be able to fix anything. > > I don't know much about FalconJS but I would be very surprised if this is > true. Can you show me one method of Fal

RE: ABC -> JS

ember 04, 2012 2:24 AM To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: ABC -> JS Quoting Gordon Smith : > The possibility of transcoding ABC -> JS (rather than AS -> JS, MXML > -> JS, CSS -> JS, and .properties -> JS) has come up on another > thread. I should men

Re: ABC -> JS

On 12/4/12 10:54 AM, "Michael Schmalle" wrote: > Ok, I get what you are saying but that is like buying a car with no > mechanic within 3000 miles. That is true for a significant portion of the AS code as well, not just FalconJS. Carol, Gordon and I didn't write every line. And many of the fo

Re: ABC -> JS

Quoting Alex Harui : On 12/4/12 9:53 AM, "Michael Schmalle" wrote: Quoting Alex Harui : On 12/4/12 2:24 AM, "Michael Schmalle" wrote: What makes that code REALLY confusing is although you say he is using AS, there is a huge amount of ABC opcode in that code he wrote. Are you talk

Re: ABC -> JS

On 12/4/12 9:53 AM, "Michael Schmalle" wrote: > > Quoting Alex Harui : > >> >> >> >> On 12/4/12 2:24 AM, "Michael Schmalle" wrote: >>> What makes that code REALLY confusing is although you say he is using >>> AS, there is a huge amount of ABC opcode in that code he wrote. >> Are you talk

Re: ABC -> JS

I have interest, but like you my problem is time. I'm in the last sprint of a big project and I'm hoping my schedule frees up as we head into the new year. Lots of things on my todo list right now. :/ -omar On Tuesday, December 4, 2012, Michael Schmalle wrote: > > Quoting Alex Harui : > > >> >>

Re: ABC -> JS

Quoting Alex Harui : On 12/4/12 2:24 AM, "Michael Schmalle" wrote: What makes that code REALLY confusing is although you say he is using AS, there is a huge amount of ABC opcode in that code he wrote. Are you talking about JSEmmitter? I'm talking about the classes in general. My questio

Re: ABC -> JS

On 12/4/12 2:24 AM, "Michael Schmalle" wrote: > What makes that code REALLY confusing is although you say he is using > AS, there is a huge amount of ABC opcode in that code he wrote. Are you talking about JSEmmitter? > > SO I will say to anybody, in the current state of the FalconJS > compile

Re: ABC -> JS

Quoting Michael Schmalle : One advantage of ABC -> JS is that it solves the problem of having a 3rd party SWC that you don't have source code for but want to transcode to JS. Couldn't we write an intermediary SWC parsing tool that could create classes with native stubs (b

Re: ABC -> JS

Quoting Gordon Smith : The possibility of transcoding ABC -> JS (rather than AS -> JS, MXML -> JS, CSS -> JS, and .properties -> JS) has come up on another thread. I should mention that this approach is the one that the architect of the Falcon compiler (Chris Brichford, wh

Re: ABC -> JS

For that matter you could just load and parse the ABC right in Javascript at runtime: https://github.com/mozilla/shumway Kevin N. On 12/3/2012 3:49 PM, Gordon Smith wrote: The possibility of transcoding ABC -> JS (rather than AS -> JS, MXML -> JS, CSS -> JS, and .properties -&g

RE: ABC -> JS

To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: ABC -> JS On Monday, December 3, 2012, Gordon Smith wrote: > The possibility of transcoding ABC -> JS (rather than AS -> JS, MXML > -> JS, CSS -> JS, and .properties -> JS) has come up on another > thread. I should mention

Re: ABC -> JS

On Monday, December 3, 2012, Gordon Smith wrote: > The possibility of transcoding ABC -> JS (rather than AS -> JS, MXML -> > JS, CSS -> JS, and .properties -> JS) has come up on another thread. I > should mention that this approach is the one that the architect of the

ABC -> JS

The possibility of transcoding ABC -> JS (rather than AS -> JS, MXML -> JS, CSS -> JS, and .properties -> JS) has come up on another thread. I should mention that this approach is the one that the architect of the Falcon compiler (Chris Brichford, who recently left Adobe)