flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Schmalle <teotigraphix...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [FalconJX JXEmitter] Output question, again
Date Fri, 29 May 2015 21:52:00 GMT
Yeah sorry if I sound like a flake right now.

There are things I have in the emitter right now that need to be there for
some DOM majic and some other meta data additions I want to bring over from
Randori. Mike had such a good idea with Randori, it's a shame it turned out
the way it did.

I am going to switch out the back end with the same code and see what it
does right now.

But this is what I was saying with eventually trying to astract some of
your code. I know I won't be able to use the emitter the way it is. I need
to modify things and have a bit more flexibility.

Anyway I will post back when I test it.


On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 5:46 PM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:

> On 5/29/15, 2:35 PM, "Michael Schmalle" <teotigraphixllc@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Ok,
> >
> >I am at a point where I have some time to spend getting this "vanilla"
> >compiler working.
> >
> >Since this stuff really confuses me, it's not my game. :)
> >
> >Just base my output for now on the utilities that FlexJS uses?
> >
> >goog.provide()
> >goog.require()
> >goog.inherits()
> >
> >
> >Object.defineProperties(org_apache_flex_html_CheckBox.prototype, {
> >});
> >
> >
> >???????
> Yes.  Really, I think you can just use the FlexJS backend.  Then once you
> see how it works maybe it will be more clear where you switch stuff out
> for other dependency and inheritance patterns.
> >
> >
> >I guess for now I am just going to emulate what you are doing Alex.
> >Package
> >names and everything, I can't see coming up with something when there are
> >about 3 people in the conversation.
> >
> >I guess this way you and Peter will have something that directly
> >translates.
> >
> >I don't have to use the GCC for anything using this stuff right? Since
> >it's
> >all under the hood, I am just thinking it can change down the road and I
> >just want to move forward.
> Yes, the GCC plugs in after all the transpiling.  See
> MXMLFlexJSPublisher.java.  It serves mostly as a minifier, but it does
> catch errors in our hand coded JS.  But its usefulness for the latter
> might go down significantly if all of our JS is transpiled from FalconJX.
> -Alex

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message