flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Frédéric THOMAS <webdoubl...@hotmail.com>
Subject RE: [FalconJX FlexJS] JQuery up and running, a nightmare but we now have 1.9 in AS
Date Fri, 26 Jun 2015 16:43:50 GMT
>>Remains the tests, I guess we should make people able to test the
>>produced JS code, for example adding Jasmine as externs ?
>
> Certainly don’t want to rule out any testing frameworks. We have some
> Selenium tests running now.

Me neither, just because this one is widely used:

"Jasmine seems to be the most popular of the three (based on discussions with other programmers,
and from number of stars on the repository)." https://coderwall.com/p/ntbixw/javascript-test-framework-comparison

I just want to add one more extern, https://github.com/google/closure-compiler/blob/master/contrib/externs/jasmine-2.0.js

Any objections ?

> I’ve pondered whether we can cross-compile
> FlexUnit or not and use it on the JS side.

Really ? :-) So ?

>>>>What about protected methods ? can
>>>>myClassExtendsObjectInstance["myProtectedMethodFromClassA"]() is
>>>>supposed
>>>>throw an Error ?
>>>
>>> With someInstance[“someProp”] patterns, I don’t think any compiler
>>>checks
>>> for that.
>>
>>I wasn't talking about the compile time but the runtime here.
>
> And that would be the value of being able to run your AS in a SWF in
> Flash, just to check that.

I don't get what you are saying, my goal was to check at what point the produced JS code matches
the written AS3 code since I've seen this private function be called so easily in JS, I thought
the produced code had a AS3 standard, now I know it has not.

Frédéric THOMAS


----------------------------------------
> From: aharui@adobe.com
> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [FalconJX FlexJS] JQuery up and running, a nightmare but we now have 1.9
in AS
> Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 16:18:54 +0000
>
>
>
> On 6/26/15, 8:46 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <webdoublefx@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>Now folks who want to use the externs SWCs to go right at JS have a
>>> different problem. There is no SWF to catch these issues. If we need a
>>> more complex transpilar to make these folks happy well, then that’s what
>>> we’ll have to do.
>>
>>Yes, I didn't have only this process (coding in MXML / AS3, create a SWF
>>and debug in the IDE) in mind, to me folks could code directly for FLEXJS
>>output type too, for example creating an AS3/JS component library, in
>>this scenario, the debugging is JS only for the JS part even though they
>>have the ease to code it in AS3 as we have externs now.
>>
>>Remains the tests, I guess we should make people able to test the
>>produced JS code, for example adding Jasmine as externs ?
>
> Certainly don’t want to rule out any testing frameworks. We have some
> Selenium tests running now. I’ve pondered whether we can cross-compile
> FlexUnit or not and use it on the JS side.
>
>>>
>>> Did you test the minified JS in js-release or the debug version in
>>> js-debug? If js-release, the GCC might have removed it since it didn’t
>>> see anybody calling it.
>>
>>Yes, I have this issue even with the the js-debug
>
> Weird. Will have to try it when I find time. This is a vacation week for
> Adobe so I will be a bit slower.
>
>>
>>>>What about protected methods ? can
>>>>myClassExtendsObjectInstance["myProtectedMethodFromClassA"]() is
>>>>supposed
>>>>throw an Error ?
>>>
>>> With someInstance[“someProp”] patterns, I don’t think any compiler
>>>checks
>>> for that.
>>
>>I wasn't talking about the compile time but the runtime here.
>
> And that would be the value of being able to run your AS in a SWF in
> Flash, just to check that.
>
> -Alex
>
 		 	   		  
Mime
View raw message