Mailing-List: contact dev-help@flex.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@flex.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <D3EA84A6.7424C%aharui@adobe.com>
References: <CANDXkxD6ceZ=VzUuZQu6+tB3bx2TFzO2xZ-u-JGXAtzHzq0yiA@mail.gmail.com>
 <D3E67526.73F7A%aharui@adobe.com> <CANDXkxBNh9BTz94nGsK=dgVMoQ8DRDw43zijXtc-gf1qSK7aYg@mail.gmail.com>
 <D3E90D41.74126%aharui@adobe.com> <CANDXkxD67qBhqGusRutwtsMbVMtZYxoxC7tmOD4bCpx-Nt4-BQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <D3EA84A6.7424C%aharui@adobe.com>
From: Greg Dove <greg.dove@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 08:12:36 +1200
Message-ID: <CANDXkxAKbQ3dXs8bY3kWFqauCd=7qT1oV7Qmr32ZMkvaZgF_nw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [FlexJX][Falcon] Binding support fixes/improvements
To: dev@flex.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113d4bc019a0bd053b4f9a83
archived-at: Tue, 30 Aug 2016 20:12:44 -0000

--001a113d4bc019a0bd053b4f9a83
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Thanks for the feedback Alex.
I had also received encouragement from Justin a long time ago to
contribute, I'm happy that I finally got a chance to do so.

tbh I had not even looked inside manual tests folder yet (there's a lot in
there!), but that definitely sounds like a better place for that example,
it really is a 'manual test'.

it might require the addition of :

<arg
value="-compiler.binding-event-handler-interface=org.apache.flex.events.IEventDispatcher"
/>
<arg
value="-compiler.binding-event-handler-class=org.apache.flex.events.EventDispatcher"
/>
<arg
value="-compiler.binding-event-handler-event=org.apache.flex.events.Event"
/>

to the build_example ant file targets, if you didn't already add it

In terms of my sleeves, I hope to find something more up there within the
next couple of weeks. My regular client work is in a bit of a lull, so I am
making use of the time to get familiar with FlexJS.
I actually already started work on updates in reflection, and only ended up
in bindings because I saw some issues. I will go back to reflection again
next, with a goal of getting identical results in swf and js. Some of the
stuff I added to the JSSessionModel will help with what I needed to do
there anyhow.

I will definitely add to or update any relevant existing unit-tests on this
next work.

cheers,
Greg


On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:

> Hi Greg,
>
> OK, I looked through your patches and applied them to the develop branch.
> I couldn't see anything obviously wrong with it, so great job and thanks
> for contributing!  I hope you have more up your sleeve.
>
> FWIW, it would be nice to unit tests in flex-falcon and maybe flex-asjs.
> I'm going to move your example to the manual tests folder in a minute here
> as I think it belongs there.
>
> Thanks again,
> -Alex
>
> On 8/28/16, 10:10 PM, "Greg Dove" <greg.dove@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Hey Alex, sorry I wasn't clear.
> >
> >"Without a test case to step through the code, I have to say that it is a
> >bit surprising that you fixed the jx output by fiddling with
> >ASCompilationUnit and ClassDirectiveProcessor instead of the emitters."
> >
> >I meant specifically emitters outside of jx js emitters, and VF2JS was an
> >example of one I did not touch. AMD is another. I definitely made changes
> >in the FlexJSEmitter stuff.
> >
> >The ClassDIrectiveProcessor change was just for falcon/swf - I made
> >similar
> >changes for the js emitters, and implemented the IEventDispatcher
> >variation
> >as well as it was not currently implemented in jx.
> >
> >I will be submitting PRs within the next 15 mins. I won't add a lot of
> >text
> >with the PR - so please ask if you have any questions as to why I did
> >things the way I did. Some of it may be a little 'clumsy' perhaps.
> >
> >cheers
> >Greg
> >
> >On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Greg,
> >>
> >> Without a test case to step through the code, I have to say that it is a
> >> bit surprising that you fixed the jx output by fiddling with
> >> ASCompilationUnit and ClassDirectiveProcessor instead of the emitters.
> >>
> >> I guess I'll wait to see the PR.  Maybe it will make more sense then.  I
> >> guess maybe you needed to make that change to affect the AST?
> >>
> >> Fundamentally, the compiler creates an AST, then Falcon (the SWF
> >>compiler)
> >> uses Reducers to reduce the AST to ABC code.  FalconJX uses BlockWalkers
> >> and Emitters.  There are different emitters for different output
> >>formats.
> >> The vf2js emitters were an attempt to do a straight cross-compile of the
> >> existing Flex SDK code.  It is not being used by FlexJS.
> >>
> >> Looking forward to it,
> >> -Alex
> >>
> >> On 8/28/16, 8:51 PM, "Greg Dove" <greg.dove@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Thanks Alex,
> >> >
> >> >There are definitely bugs, and I have addressed those that I found in
> >>the
> >> >testbed example I already made a PR for. The others should beWhether I
> >> >have
> >> >addressed them appropriately or not I can't say, but if the way I have
> >> >done
> >> >things is not consistent with the compiler architecture or any general
> >> >java
> >> >coding standards, then at the very least it should provide clues for
> >>you
> >> >or
> >> >someone else for what needs to be done in a more appropriate way. And
> >>if
> >> >it
> >> >is unclear why I did anything in particular please ask.
> >> >
> >> >One of the things I ended up doing was to move the 'extends
> >> >EventDispatcher' implementation from ASCompilationUnit to
> >> >ClassDIrectiveProcessor for falcon and to provide a corresponding
> >> >implementation in jx. There seemed to be times when that original
> >> >implementation was not being applied when it ought to have been, and it
> >> >also seemed like ClassDirectiveProcessor was a more natural home for
> >>it,
> >> >alongside the other 'implements IEventDispatcher' implementation for
> >> >binding support.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >In terms of your suggestion about asking questions... I appreciate your
> >> >intent here, I think most people prefer not to ask stupid questions
> >>(even
> >> >if there is a culture of 'no such thing as a stupid question'), and I
> >> >needed to get my head around the compiler a bit first before asking too
> >> >many questions, otherwise most of the questions would probably be
> >>stupid
> >> >ones about how it works!
> >> >I used this exercise to help me understand the basics, and I personally
> >> >find this approach is much better for for me to learn anything new over
> >> >asking lots of questions (it may not be the most efficient to arrive at
> >> >the
> >> >knowledge, but it helps me get to a deeper understanding faster I
> >>think).
> >> >Also, although all you guys are great at responding quickly here, I am
> >> >used
> >> >to the immediacy of some form of chat, otherwise I am usually already
> >> >trying to answer my questions myself, particularly if I am already
> >>focused
> >> >on it.  IRC is a good option here that some OS teams use, because it is
> >> >possible to set up some logging (and therefore can be made searchable,
> >>if
> >> >required). But some people find IRC a bit 'old school' :).
> >> >
> >> >I will likely ask more questions in the future, but I do have a more
> >> >general question now:
> >> >
> >> >Also, in terms of changing emitter support in jx for js output, I have
> >>not
> >> >touched anything outside of js emitters - is that usually ok? I don't
> >>even
> >> >know what vf2js or some of the others are for.... but I do see that
> >>some
> >> >of
> >> >the various emitter classes have duplicated or similar code in parts of
> >> >them. I did wonder about whether I was supposed to do anything
> >>elsewhere
> >> >as
> >> >well, but as I did not really understand it, I chose to stop
> >>wondering. :)
> >> >
> >> >cheers,
> >> >Greg
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 5:40 PM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Sounds great!  Looking forward to it.
> >> >>
> >> >> It might be better in the future if you ask more questions as you go
> >> >> along.  I think the compiler already does IEventDispatcher although I
> >> >> wouldn't be surprised if the current code has bugs, so discussing
> >>early
> >> >> can help make sure you are spending your cycles appropriately.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> -Alex
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>

--001a113d4bc019a0bd053b4f9a83--