flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de>
Subject AW: AW: [FlexJS] More SWCs
Date Fri, 10 Apr 2015 20:46:11 GMT
Reading this, by that change we would actually get FlexMojos support out of the box :-) Great
stuff!

I remember the night I had to work through to get the first Flexmojos FlexJS build up and
runnning prior to the Apache EU last year :-) The main problem was that the SWCs weren't at
all different from the "default" ones and that the structure of the JS stuff was completely
different and monolithic.

As soon as I have the Mavenizer out the door, That nasty Flexmojos Bug fixed and my latest
changes to the mavenizer reflected in Flexmojos ... ok ... perhaps I'll stick a few hours
in FlexUnit and then I'll be glad to help get FlexJS on the road :-)

Chris

________________________________________
Von: Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com>
Gesendet: Freitag, 10. April 2015 17:32
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: AW: [FlexJS] More SWCs

Mike, Fred,

Thanks for the info.  Sounds like you did something more complex than what
I’m thinking, or maybe I’m not considering something.  I sure hope it
doesn’t take me 4 months.  What were the difficult parts of doing this?

You can already stick files in a SWC.  They are just zip archives.  I was
just going to have COMPJSC open the SWC, jam the folder of js files it
created into the SWC and update the catalog.xml.  MXMLJSC would open the
SWCs and deploy the JS files to the js-debug output folder.

I’ll definitely take a closer look at the Randori Bundle code when I
actually get around to this.

Thanks again,
-Alex

On 4/10/15, 6:17 AM, "Michael Schmalle" <teotigraphixllc@gmail.com> wrote:

>Fred, haha I was JUST ABOUT TO POST THAT LINK! Wow weird! :)
>
>On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 9:15 AM, Frédéric THOMAS <webdoublefx@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Hi Alex,
>>
>> Thinking about it, if your goal is to pack up JS and SWCs files together
>> in a resource bundle file and make the compiler to read it, I guess
>>most of
>> this work as been done already around the concept of Resource Bundle
>> Library (.rbl files) in Randori [1], if this matches your needs, I don't
>> think it is hard to pick up.
>>
>> Frédéric THOMAS
>>
>> [1]
>>
>>https://github.com/RandoriAS/randori-compiler/tree/develop/src/test/java/
>>randori/compiler/bundle
>>
>> > From: christofer.dutz@c-ware.de
>> > To: dev@flex.apache.org
>> > Subject: AW: [FlexJS]  More SWCs
>> > Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 07:02:24 +0000
>> >
>> > Hi Alex,
>> >
>> > I was hoping to finish my other stuff sooner and then be able to
>>assist
>> you with this.
>> > As I don't know how long I need to fix one bug in Flexmojos I stumbled
>> over yesterday, I'll write up my whishlist ;-)
>> >
>> > It would be great if a FlexJS archive would contain both the
>> flash-related classes as well as the matching js portions (eventually
>>in a
>> directory "js") so I can change Flexmojos to unpack all "js/**" stuff
>>to a
>> local directory and use that for compiling. Currently I have to add the
>>swc
>> deps normally and add the big fat js-resources archive as a compiler
>> dependency. Bringing both together would be a MAJOR benefit for all
>> "(Better) IDE support" issues out there ;-)
>> >
>> > Chris
>> >
>> > ________________________________________
>> > Von: Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com>
>> > Gesendet: Freitag, 10. April 2015 08:05
>> > An: dev@flex.apache.org
>> > Betreff: [FlexJS]  More SWCs
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > As I mentioned in “The Big Rename”, I’m thinking of creating more
>>SWCs.
>> > As I started in on it, it occurred to me that after this refactoring,
>>my
>> > next goal is to try to see if we can pack the JS files into a SWC so
>>the
>> > SWC becomes the single deliverable for a library.  Doing so simplifies
>> the
>> > command-line syntax so it is the same for both AS and JS, and I think
>>it
>> > makes it easier for Maven to work with FlexJS SWCs.
>> >
>> > But the question that I came up with is, if we do pack JS in the SWCs:
>> how
>> > many SWCs should there be?  For example, right now, for charts, some
>>of
>> > the charts code is in the FlexJSUI SWC and thus has handwritten JS,
>>and a
>> > bunch more code is in the FlexJSJX SWC and the JS is generated by
>> > cross-compiling the AS.
>> >
>> > The easiest thing to do right now is simply carve the chart files from
>> > FlexJSJX into a SWC and the other chart files from FlexJSUI into their
>> own
>> > SWC, but then you have the charting code divided between two SWCs.
>>Maybe
>> > it is better to try to re-work the build scripts and CompC to put all
>>the
>> > chart code in one SWC.  What do others think?
>> >
>> > Related, we could make lots of small swcs or fewer bigger ones.  What
>>do
>> > folks think of that?  There could be a SWC for:
>> >
>> > -Effects
>> > -Collections
>> > -Binding
>> > -Graphics
>> > -HTTPService
>> > -Charts
>> > -Mobile
>> > -Formatters
>> > -DragDrop
>> > -Google Maps
>> > -Jquery
>> > -CreateJS
>> >
>> > And, if we actually have two SWCs (one for cross-compiled code, one
>>for
>> > handwritten JS) that’s a lot of SWCs.
>> >
>> > Anyway, let me know your thoughts, but I’m thinking that lots of SWCs
>> > might be the better route.
>> >
>> > -Alex
>> >
>>
>>


Mime
View raw message