flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com>
Subject Re: [FalconJX][FlexJS] Do we still want to use Google Closure Library? (was Re: [FalconJX] JXEmitter accessors)
Date Thu, 28 May 2015 18:14:31 GMT

On 5/28/15, 10:43 AM, "Josh Tynjala" <joshtynjala@gmail.com> wrote:

>ES5 is my preference too. I think ES6 would be interesting because the
>would look a bit closer to AS3, but with the polyfills and the
>implementations in browsers being pretty new still, I'm wary of adopting
>at this point in time.

OK, so I think that means that we use some other thing instead of

Do we also want to trade in goog.require/provide for RequireJS, AMD, or
something else?

What should we do about dispatching events on non-DOM objects?  We have
that in AS and I think folks will want that in JS.  Early on, I had a
simple implementation of EventDispatcher for non-DOM objects.  We could go
back to that, but then that’s just another chunk of code that needs to be
debugged.  Events for non-DOM objects is pretty simple because it doesn’t
have to worry about bubbling.

Erik points out that the Closure JSDoc annotations help the minifier.  I
think the output of FalconJX can still generate the Closure JSDoc, or is
there some other minifier that we want to use that uses different

So, in the net, we are only swapping out goog.inherit for now?  I think
that’s ok with me.


View raw message