Mailing-List: contact flex-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <20121231094020.13506bzk06sgathw@franklin.liquidweb.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2012 09:40:20 -0500
From: Michael Schmalle <apache@teotigraphix.com>
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [Wiki] AS3 language features to be simulated
References: <20121231073524.11423k1xqce5f2bw@franklin.liquidweb.com>
 <CAD8jDGK1mifsqEGbt_YrTj2wRo3KU27deySE3xU0OG1YMbPBTg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAD8jDGK1mifsqEGbt_YrTj2wRo3KU27deySE3xU0OG1YMbPBTg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=ISO-8859-1;
 DelSp="Yes";
 format="flowed"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Dynamic Internet Messaging Program (DIMP) H3 (1.1.8)

No, you didn't confuse me.

I think for the time being I will keep my eyes shut to these  
implementation discussions. :) I have to go back now and finish some  
things with the compiler, configuration etc in the project before I  
focus back on the js production.

I did checkout your project from GIT locally and will use that to  
start investigating in my free time. I probably will also create  
another emitter subclass to experiment with producing your examples so  
we can compare the two down the road.

If I do this, it may allow you to check out the FalconJx code and  
start submitting some patches against it.

Mike

Quoting Frank Wienberg <frank@jangaroo.net>:

> Hi Mike,
>
> sorry if I confused you, the Wiki page is still work in progress and much
> my "brain dump" of all AS3 features I know have to be simulated, and also
> how I'd suggest to do so.
> As I continue, I'm going to add more illustrating examples. Concerning the
> private members, I think you are on the right track. The "class inheritance
> level" I am talking about is an optimization over using the fully qualified
> name of the class as postfix for private fields. In Jangaroo, we compute
> the inheritance level (or depth) of the class and simply use that number.
> This also ensures unique identifiers, as a class can never have the same
> inheritance level as any super or sub class.
>
> Greetings
> -Frank-
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Michael Schmalle
> <apache@teotigraphix.com>wrote:
>
>> Hey Frank,
>>
>> I'm getting a bit confused here. I guess I really need to spend some time
>> and get the relevant javascript information under my belt.
>>
>> Is what you are showing on this page, your solution?
>>
>> Please comment on the below if the code is what you are talking about in
>> those paragraphs;
>>
>>
>> Members and visibility
>> ---------------------------
>>
>> private function _privateMethod():void {
>> }
>>   - this._privateMethod()
>>
>> public var foo:int;
>>   - foo = 42
>>
>> private var foo:int;
>>   - foo$FooClass = 42
>>
>> internal bar:int;
>>   - bar$foo_bar_baz
>>
>> The above seems like it's going to be pretty universal regardless of what
>> production scheme we use. Is there any articles you know about that explain
>> JS scope and how it's implemented? Or is that just the ECMA5 specs?
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Michael Schmalle - Teoti Graphix, LLC
>> http://www.teotigraphix.com
>> http://blog.teotigraphix.com
>>
>>
>

-- 
Michael Schmalle - Teoti Graphix, LLC
http://www.teotigraphix.com
http://blog.teotigraphix.com