flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Schmalle <apa...@teotigraphix.com>
Subject Re: [FalconJx] state/no state
Date Sun, 20 Jan 2013 11:38:54 GMT
I knew I looked at what you did before.

I see no problem with that Erik, if you test visitAcessor() and it  
does what you want and in the context of the method which is to test  
the production of a unit where the unit here is a field and  
Object.defineProperty() so that is good.

Does my thinking about state make sense to you with this example? We  
are trying to avoid crossed wires.


Quoting Erik de Bruin <erik@ixsoftware.nl>:

> Hi,
> I'm aware we're trying to keep a state-less thing going with FJx, but
> I ran into an issue that I'm not sure how to solve without adding some
> kind of storage (private variable) on the 'goog' emitter.
> The thing is that a property has/can have both a getter and a setter
> accessor. For a full 'goog' implementation, in addition to emitting
> 'Object.defineProperty' for each, we also want to add a property
> declaration on the prototype, to set the type. We want to add this
> declaration only once, so my solution is to 'remember' if I already
> added it in a private variable, since I know of no other way of
> checking if I have already written something to the output.
> Am I doing it right?
> EdB
> --
> Ix Multimedia Software
> Jan Luykenstraat 27
> 3521 VB Utrecht
> T. 06-51952295
> I. www.ixsoftware.nl

Michael Schmalle - Teoti Graphix, LLC

View raw message