incubator-flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com>
Subject Re: [FlaconJS] pseudo emitter algorithm
Date Fri, 30 Nov 2012 23:04:14 GMT
OK, what did I write that is confusing everybody?

IIUC, MXML is parsed into a different set of nodes which are then visited in
the tree walk to generate ABC codes directly.  When compiling the AS in an
MXML script block or a .AS file, the AS AST nodes go through Jburg and
eventually become ABC.

FalconJS only overrides the AS AST nodes to generate JS.  I don't think it
will generate anything for MXML, but I haven't tried it.

MXML -> ABC is mostly or all in MXMLClassDirectiveProcessor.java.

I think FalconJS will have to swap/overlay/override what that class does to
generate JS.

What MXML currently resolves to in ABC is the equivalent of a bunch of
functions that construct the tags in the MXML.  For many reasons which I
have mentioned before, I am planning to change the ABC that it generates to
generate a data structure.  And then FalconJS will need to generate the same
data structure in JS.

Does that help?

On 11/30/12 2:51 PM, "Daniel Wasilewski" <devudesign@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm trying to follow, but I feel the same.
> 
> My main confusion came from the one thing. I've got in my mind AST is
> just AST. Abstract by definition. It represents a code logic in abstract
> form.
> Why JS would collide with AS? Why the Falcon after AST coming back to
> AS? AST says, create class, create method, create method body,
> expression and evaluate it.
> And now if JS is a target should have grammar definition how to create a
> class, method and represent evaluation. Am I missing a point of
> compilers, parsers etc?
> 
> 
> On 11/30/2012 7:41 PM, Michael Schmalle wrote:
>> Ok, I'm a bit confused but my brain is probably going to explode any
>> minute and that is about all from me for a bit.
>> 
>> I'll just sit back and see if any other conversations come up about as
>> -> js. Maybe I'm crazy and just want to create more work for myself.
>> 
>> Maybe the way it stands ABC -> js is good enough for now?
>> 
>> Mike
>> 
>> 
>> Quoting Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com>:
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 11/30/12 11:05 AM, "Michael Schmalle" <apache@teotigraphix.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Quoting Gordon Smith <gosmith@adobe.com>:
>>>> 
>>>>> I don't object to generating a data structure for V11, but I think
>>>>> that it makes more sense to do that as a second phase after ABC
>>>>> generation is working. Otherwise there are a lot of moving parts and
>>>>> progress will be slower.
>>>> 
>>>> Correct me if I'm wrong Alex, but Gordon, I think Alex was talking
>>>> about JavaScript data structures produced during crosscompile of MXML.
>>> No, for both AS and JS so we have the same code paths.  But fear not,
>>> the
>>> the work I did last year has a switch and all the old code paths are
>>> retained.
>>> 
>>> I accept Gordon's argument that we can finish MXML handling faster by
>>> getting Falcon to generate the old code patterns.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Alex Harui
>>> Flex SDK Team
>>> Adobe Systems, Inc.
>>> http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 

-- 
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui


Mime
View raw message