incubator-flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Wasilewski <devudes...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: ABC -> JS
Date Wed, 05 Dec 2012 21:22:31 GMT
Well, going over the actual implementation of base.js

things like:

goog.inherits = function(childCtor, parentCtor) {
   /** @constructor */
   function tempCtor() {};
   tempCtor.prototype = parentCtor.prototype;
   childCtor.superClass_ = parentCtor.prototype;
   childCtor.prototype = new tempCtor();
   /** @override */
   childCtor.prototype.constructor = childCtor;
};

looks like vanilla to me, the same I was testing on jsperfm.com, so we 
already know how it performs :)

Considering bunch of options is already implemented up there and will be 
needed by FalconJS it's just perfect, deals with namespaces much more 
efficient way (or JS friendly way so to speak) to compare to HaXe. I 
can't say anything wrong about this library. Is the old school JS before 
JQuery and literal notation era came along!

And is already developed!
There still can be a some room for performance tweaks or stripped down 
version of it, (Abstract Class and Singleton native support missing even 
in our bellowed AS3 heh)  but I'm sure this is not a case at this stage. 
Definitely let's go for it!

Thanks for that info Alex and to Original FalconJS developer.
And I can take a proper sleep now, knowing JS target is going in good 
direction.

My job and contribution is done :D

On 12/5/2012 6:39 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
> I got some interesting information from the original FalconJS developer.
>
> He said he is not using Resig's Simple JS Inheritance scheme and is using
> Google's base.js instead.  I guess I was led astray by one of the comments
> in the source.  I took a look at base.js and don't see the extend() API so
> I'm still trying to find out more.  So I will probably totally replace
> adobe.js shortly.
>
> Also, he said that base.js melts away to nothing with google closure
> compiler in advanced mode.
>
> Also, I'm still trying to understand some information he gave me about BURM
> and AST.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 12/5/12 1:54 AM, "Michael Schmalle" <apache@teotigraphix.com> wrote:
>
>> Quoting Frank Wienberg <frank@jangaroo.net>:
>>
>>>> I hear you Alex, the interest is 110%, the time is another factor. To do
>>>> this it would take a lot of time. I'm sure others would join in (I hope),
>>>> so it's really just finding the point to try.
>>>>
>>>> I know you understand but a project like that is full language and the
>>>> ActionScript language has a lot of elements.
>>>>
>>>> What I will probably start doing is try to convert some expressions,
>>>> statements and class structure off of one file, then eventually put the
>>>> blocks together. I think this would give myself more manageable mile posts.
>>>>
>>>> I would like to know if there are any others in this list that are
>>>> reading, that might have an interest in some prototyping of this idea?
>>>> Anyone out there?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> If you started a prototype to generate JS straight from the AST, I'd really
>>> like to contribute, based on my experience with Jangaroo. I have to
>>> negotiate with my employer, though, because I can't really do that in my
>>> free time.
>>> -Frank-
>>>
>> Sounds good to me, when I do this I will put it in my whiteboard. Like
>> I said, I think I will just start small and work up. You have years on
>> me doing this. :)
>>
>> Mike


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message