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: [DISCUSS] Handling of namespaces and xml
Date Wed, 18 May 2016 08:58:50 GMT
Hi Alex,

I just had a look at the content of the catalog.xml and I agree actually the information should
be available automatically without packing anything in the SWC.
How much work would it be to make the compiler use this? I am currently working on the compilation
of the examples using Maven and I manually had to add a manifest.xml file listing all components
that were referenced by MXML files in the examples.

I guess that there is currently none here that would probably be wanting to change the compiler
to support this, so as a workaround I'll implement something that generates manifests on the
fly by inspecting the classpath. But I'll make it super-easy to remove.


Von: Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com>
Gesendet: Dienstag, 17. Mai 2016 20:23:16
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: AW: [DISCUSS] Handling of namespaces and xml

On 5/17/16, 11:09 AM, "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.dutz@c-ware.de> wrote:

>The Manifest files seem to allow making a set of mxml tags be available
>using one prefix. The classes referenced by the "js" prefix fire example
>contain classes from different packages. You should have to import all
>packages individually. And you would be importing all sorts of helper
>classes you might not way to have.

I'm not sure what you mean by importing all packages.  Anyway, it appears
the manifest files are used in at least two ways:

1) In -include-namespaces. This is one way we figure out which classes go
in a SWC.
2) in -namespaces.  And that builds the mapping for MXML as you say.

>I guess the manifests are solely used by the mxml compiler.

It occurred to me that the manifests might be used by an IDE for
code-assist so they don't have to parse the SWC.  But I have no proof
either way.  Do you?

>I guess I shouldn't break anything, if I pack in the manifests in swcs
>built by Maven. So I'll give that a try.

True, but in the SWC already, there is a catalog.xml file, and in there
there is a set of <component> tags and the information there looks
identical to what is in the -manifest.xml file, so that's why I'm
wondering whether it is worth making the changes to pack the -manifest.xml
file into the SWC. Why not just have the compiler read the catalog.xml
instead?  Why put duplicate information in the SWC?


View raw message