No need to hold off. There isn't a ton of files being re-org'd.
On 11/30/12 8:19 AM, "Erik de Bruin" wrote:
> Excellent. I'll hold off from moving until I've grokked your Wiki
> entry and everything is working again, but it's good to know we won't
> be in each other's way.
>
> EdB
>
>
> On
Excellent. I'll hold off from moving until I've grokked your Wiki
entry and everything is working again, but it's good to know we won't
be in each other's way.
EdB
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 5:15 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
> I think you can just work in the develop branch. I'm going to be in the
> fal
I think you can just work in the develop branch. I'm going to be in the
falcon folders for a while anyway (I think).
On 11/30/12 8:05 AM, "Erik de Bruin" wrote:
> I've branched the root into my whiteboard.
>
> I'm currently doing a major reorganisation of the JS framework (files,
> not code)
I've branched the root into my whiteboard.
I'm currently doing a major reorganisation of the JS framework (files,
not code) and the general setup of the project. I've also started work
on the 'publisher', that will take the AS, compile it to JS, add the
JS framework to it and create the 'index.htm
I branched my whiteboard into the root. I decided to call it "asjs" because
we are developing parallel as and js frameworks. There is a develop branch
in there where we should be making our commits.
-Alex
On 11/28/12 11:21 AM, "Erik de Bruin" wrote:
>>> Are we ready to put the framework.js i
For methods, if a method name exists on parent, and also exists on
child, the extend method is adding a closure, which will preserve, and
then invoke the parent's method in _super() (line 75 in adobe.js).
As you probably know better than me, the author of [1] is a pretty
well-known JS guru. I
No, I'm not getting confused here, remember I wrote an ASDoc clone
based off the MXMLC in about 2 weeks. I completely understand what the
difference between Falcon and FalconJS is.
Basically, the MXMLJSC class is the class that does what I listed
below. It almost loads like MXMLC does.
Th
Alex,
I am sure nobody here said anything against your job and contribution.
As a starting point is great!
And at least you get us started on this. And thank you for your hard work.
But I would be careful with a gurus. There is as many JS gurus as styles
they invented.
And the guy behind jQue
On 11/28/12 1:06 PM, "Michael Schmalle" wrote:
>
> I have experience with code emitting but it used actual AST, no JBurg
> and no reducers etc.
>
> I may be getting confused to what is actually needed in a simple cross
> compiler but to me it seems;
>
> - gather all sourcepaths
> - gather l
And [1] is:
[1] http://ejohn.org/blog/simple-javascript-inheritance/
On 11/28/12 1:23 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11/28/12 12:32 PM, "Kevin Newman" wrote:
>
>> It looks like adobe.js is using the constructor method as a kind of
>> marker function, and compiling the actual construct
On 11/28/12 12:32 PM, "Kevin Newman" wrote:
> It looks like adobe.js is using the constructor method as a kind of
> marker function, and compiling the actual constructor into the 'init'
> method (which is weird IMHO, since you can inherit from the parent
> constructor, and protect the prototyp
Ha,
I just spent 2 hours looking at the code in FalconJS to try and
understand the pattern.
From a highlevel I get what they are doing but when it actually comes
to programming, there is so much indirection and composition I highly
doubt I could even attempt to use this pattern to create
It looks like adobe.js is using the constructor method as a kind of
marker function, and compiling the actual constructor into the 'init'
method (which is weird IMHO, since you can inherit from the parent
constructor, and protect the prototype chain without calling the
constructor via other mea
Can any JS savvy person here tell me how according to adobe.js module
pattern call super? I just lost my head..., got 3 classes extending each
other and the only top one call init(); I am preparing those performance
tests for comparison.
Dan
On 11/28/12 11:21 AM, "Erik de Bruin" wrote:
>>> Are we ready to put the framework.js in the FalconJS develop branch so
>>> we can all work on it?
>> IMO, framework.js shouldn't be in the FalconJS branch. It is as independent
>> of FalconJS as any of the AS code is independent of Falcon.
>>
Ok,
Challenge accepted.
I was just looking through the cmc-js.jbg file. I actually think this
might be doable. The JavaScript impl looks very complicated but,
that's because it's doing a lot of things right now as far as building
the .js code.
I'm going to start small and see what I get.
On 11/28/12 11:27 AM, "Michael Schmalle" wrote:
>
> Are we creating just views? Are we creating business logic? As you can
> see I have confused myself here.
>
> What would be really kewl is if someone reading this says, Mike I bet
> you can go from A to B to C then D. If I saw the whole pr
Quoting Alex Harui :
On 11/28/12 10:48 AM, "Michael Schmalle" wrote:
I think you can pretty much throw away about 1/2 of my thoughts below
based in my misunderstanding of the emitter stage. I wanted a visitor
pattern, it's being used in the JSEmitter.
There seems to also be a CMCEmitter a
>> Are we ready to put the framework.js in the FalconJS develop branch so
>> we can all work on it?
> IMO, framework.js shouldn't be in the FalconJS branch. It is as independent
> of FalconJS as any of the AS code is independent of Falcon.
>
> I would refactor framework.js into separate js files s
On 11/28/12 10:48 AM, "Michael Schmalle" wrote:
>
> I think you can pretty much throw away about 1/2 of my thoughts below
> based in my misunderstanding of the emitter stage. I wanted a visitor
> pattern, it's being used in the JSEmitter.
There seems to also be a CMCEmitter as well as a JSEmit
Thanks for the information.
I'm not afraid of the compiler for sure, it was the reducer and abc
stuff that confused me. After reading what you wrote about the reducer
I just went back to the code and looked at it again with a fresh
perspective and see it's basically the visitor pattern that
On 11/28/12 10:00 AM, "Erik de Bruin" wrote:
> Thank you Alex.
>
> FYI, I was able to hack in an Image component by copying and modifying
> the Label component in framework.js and 'faking' the generated code
> that implements it. So that's promising for future work ;-)
>
> Note: I thought I'
On 11/28/12 3:01 AM, "Michael Schmalle" wrote:
> Very interesting Alex. I like this quote:
>
> "The initial versions will be relatively feature-poor compared to
> Flex, but the hope is that the architecture is small enough and
> modular enough to allow Apache Flex community members, many who
Thank you Alex.
FYI, I was able to hack in an Image component by copying and modifying
the Label component in framework.js and 'faking' the generated code
that implements it. So that's promising for future work ;-)
Note: I thought I'd add another Label in the mix. This showed up and
initiated wel
On 11/28/12 12:37 AM, "Joan Llenas Masó" wrote:
> I like the approach (I just read the wiki, didn't look at the JS vs AS
> implementation parts). It has a lot of sense.
> I think that Goals vs Non Goals are a key part, specially this statement: "we
> will encapsulate the best implementation po
Very interesting Alex. I like this quote:
"The initial versions will be relatively feature-poor compared to
Flex, but the hope is that the architecture is small enough and
modular enough to allow Apache Flex community members, many who are
participating in their spare time, to participate w
Hi Alex,
I take a quick look over it and seems very promising, hope to come back
later with some more time and dig it a bit more.
As Joan points, it would be great to know how to setup the project to play
with it.
Many thanks!
Carlos
2012/11/28 Joan Llenas Masó
> I like the approach (I just
I like the approach (I just read the wiki, didn't look at the JS vs AS
implementation parts). It has a lot of sense.
I think that Goals vs Non Goals are a key part, specially this statement: "we
will encapsulate the best implementation possible under a given API contract
".
Specially if we want to
Hi,
I finally got permission to check in a demo that uses FalconJS into my
whiteboard at [1].
I started a writeup on it on the wiki that I will try to complete tomorrow
at [2].
[1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/flex/whiteboard/aharui/flexjs
[2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/displa
29 matches
Mail list logo
