flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Schmalle <teotigraphix...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: AW: [FlexJS] More SWCs
Date Sat, 11 Apr 2015 13:11:18 GMT
Don't worry about it. I just have been trying to estimate time as well and
currently, its to much right now to be helpful with anything.

I just have to stick with Feathers and AIR right now on the GPU.

Mike

On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 6:23 AM, Frédéric THOMAS <webdoublefx@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> > Fred, are you interested in FlexJS/this type of dev? I mean, if there was
> another person on board that knew what was going on with this stuff and say
> IntelliJ, it would be a lot more appealing to me to try and find some dev
> time for it. It's such a shame all the work we put into this stuff Fred.
>
>
> No, not really interested to spend a lot of time on it, the main technical
> reason is the current limitations of the compiler but if people think it
> could be a useful, I can check if the plugin still works with the last
> version of IJ and what it would cost to update it as it could certainly be
> used for FlexJS
>
>
> Frédéric THOMAS
>
> > Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 12:37:47 -0400
> > Subject: Re: AW: [FlexJS] More SWCs
> > From: teotigraphixllc@gmail.com
> > To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >
> > > Don't hesitate to correct or complete me Mike, that's a long time.
> >
> > Correct Fred.
> >
> > Fred, are you interested in FlexJS/this type of dev? I mean, if there was
> > another person on board that knew what was going on with this stuff and
> say
> > IntelliJ, it would be a lot more appealing to me to try and find some dev
> > time for it. It's such a shame all the work we put into this stuff Fred.
> >
> > Alex, you know how I said I couldn't really justify doing this little
> hobby
> > if I didn't have a project. Well, in the last week I put together this in
> > Feathers/AIR using UDP communication to talk to Bitiwg;
> >
> > http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=259&t=435857
> >
> > It seems that is Javascript can send UDP messages, this might actually be
> > an excuse for me to contribute to this project. Being able to create an
> > application with FlexJS that would do the same thing as the app I just
> > made, but the UI mad in HTML. I am using OSC UPD messages, so it's not
> like
> > that app has to be native if Javascript could communicate that way.
> >
> > I admit, javascript and I are not best friends but I could see that as
> > being me test project.
> >
> > So Fred, where are you at these days?
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Frédéric THOMAS <
> webdoublefx@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Alex,
> > >
> > > The SWCs format as it is today could be read not only by the compiler
> but
> > > amongs the tools, the IDEs, extending the existing structure seems
> fine but
> > > introducing a new one  could break them, in RBL, we can have the SWC,
> the
> > > AS sources, the JS classes, 1 all classes JS and the minified JS too
> IIRC
> > > managed by container / categories and the compiler knows how to deal
> with
> > > each of them individually and we have also the version of the RBL /
> > > compiler it can be used with.
> > >
> > > Don't hesitate to correct or complete me Mike, that's a long time.
> > >
> > > Frédéric THOMAS
> > >
> > > > From: aharui@adobe.com
> > > > To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: AW: [FlexJS] More SWCs
> > > > Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 15:32:16 +0000
> > > >
> > > > 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
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message