> Fred, are you interested in FlexJS/this type of dev? I mean, if there was another person on board that knew what was going on with this stuff and say IntelliJ, it would be a lot more appealing to me to try and find some dev time for it. It's such a shame all the work we put into this stuff Fred.
No, not really interested to spend a lot of time on it, the main technical reason is the current limitations of the compiler but if people think it could be a useful, I can check if the plugin still works with the last version of IJ and what it would cost to update it as it could certainly be used for FlexJS Frédéric THOMAS > Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 12:37:47 -0400 > Subject: Re: AW: [FlexJS] More SWCs > From: teotigraphix...@gmail.com > To: dev@flex.apache.org > > > Don't hesitate to correct or complete me Mike, that's a long time. > > Correct Fred. > > Fred, are you interested in FlexJS/this type of dev? I mean, if there was > another person on board that knew what was going on with this stuff and say > IntelliJ, it would be a lot more appealing to me to try and find some dev > time for it. It's such a shame all the work we put into this stuff Fred. > > Alex, you know how I said I couldn't really justify doing this little hobby > if I didn't have a project. Well, in the last week I put together this in > Feathers/AIR using UDP communication to talk to Bitiwg; > > http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=259&t=435857 > > It seems that is Javascript can send UDP messages, this might actually be > an excuse for me to contribute to this project. Being able to create an > application with FlexJS that would do the same thing as the app I just > made, but the UI mad in HTML. I am using OSC UPD messages, so it's not like > that app has to be native if Javascript could communicate that way. > > I admit, javascript and I are not best friends but I could see that as > being me test project. > > So Fred, where are you at these days? > > Mike > > > On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Frédéric THOMAS <webdoubl...@hotmail.com> > wrote: > > > Alex, > > > > The SWCs format as it is today could be read not only by the compiler but > > amongs the tools, the IDEs, extending the existing structure seems fine but > > introducing a new one could break them, in RBL, we can have the SWC, the > > AS sources, the JS classes, 1 all classes JS and the minified JS too IIRC > > managed by container / categories and the compiler knows how to deal with > > each of them individually and we have also the version of the RBL / > > compiler it can be used with. > > > > Don't hesitate to correct or complete me Mike, that's a long time. > > > > Frédéric THOMAS > > > > > From: aha...@adobe.com > > > To: dev@flex.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: AW: [FlexJS] More SWCs > > > Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 15:32:16 +0000 > > > > > > Mike, Fred, > > > > > > Thanks for the info. Sounds like you did something more complex than > > what > > > I’m thinking, or maybe I’m not considering something. I sure hope it > > > doesn’t take me 4 months. What were the difficult parts of doing this? > > > > > > You can already stick files in a SWC. They are just zip archives. I was > > > just going to have COMPJSC open the SWC, jam the folder of js files it > > > created into the SWC and update the catalog.xml. MXMLJSC would open the > > > SWCs and deploy the JS files to the js-debug output folder. > > > > > > I’ll definitely take a closer look at the Randori Bundle code when I > > > actually get around to this. > > > > > > Thanks again, > > > -Alex > > > > > > On 4/10/15, 6:17 AM, "Michael Schmalle" <teotigraphix...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > >Fred, haha I was JUST ABOUT TO POST THAT LINK! Wow weird! :) > > > > > > > >On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 9:15 AM, Frédéric THOMAS < > > webdoubl...@hotmail.com> > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > >> Hi Alex, > > > >> > > > >> Thinking about it, if your goal is to pack up JS and SWCs files > > together > > > >> in a resource bundle file and make the compiler to read it, I guess > > > >>most of > > > >> this work as been done already around the concept of Resource Bundle > > > >> Library (.rbl files) in Randori [1], if this matches your needs, I > > don't > > > >> think it is hard to pick up. > > > >> > > > >> Frédéric THOMAS > > > >> > > > >> [1] > > > >> > > > >> > > https://github.com/RandoriAS/randori-compiler/tree/develop/src/test/java/ > > > >>randori/compiler/bundle > > > >> > > > >> > From: christofer.d...@c-ware.de > > > >> > To: dev@flex.apache.org > > > >> > Subject: AW: [FlexJS] More SWCs > > > >> > Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 07:02:24 +0000 > > > >> > > > > >> > Hi Alex, > > > >> > > > > >> > I was hoping to finish my other stuff sooner and then be able to > > > >>assist > > > >> you with this. > > > >> > As I don't know how long I need to fix one bug in Flexmojos I > > stumbled > > > >> over yesterday, I'll write up my whishlist ;-) > > > >> > > > > >> > It would be great if a FlexJS archive would contain both the > > > >> flash-related classes as well as the matching js portions (eventually > > > >>in a > > > >> directory "js") so I can change Flexmojos to unpack all "js/**" stuff > > > >>to a > > > >> local directory and use that for compiling. Currently I have to add > > the > > > >>swc > > > >> deps normally and add the big fat js-resources archive as a compiler > > > >> dependency. Bringing both together would be a MAJOR benefit for all > > > >> "(Better) IDE support" issues out there ;-) > > > >> > > > > >> > Chris > > > >> > > > > >> > ________________________________________ > > > >> > Von: Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> > > > >> > Gesendet: Freitag, 10. April 2015 08:05 > > > >> > An: dev@flex.apache.org > > > >> > Betreff: [FlexJS] More SWCs > > > >> > > > > >> > Hi, > > > >> > > > > >> > As I mentioned in “The Big Rename”, I’m thinking of creating more > > > >>SWCs. > > > >> > As I started in on it, it occurred to me that after this > > refactoring, > > > >>my > > > >> > next goal is to try to see if we can pack the JS files into a SWC so > > > >>the > > > >> > SWC becomes the single deliverable for a library. Doing so > > simplifies > > > >> the > > > >> > command-line syntax so it is the same for both AS and JS, and I > > think > > > >>it > > > >> > makes it easier for Maven to work with FlexJS SWCs. > > > >> > > > > >> > But the question that I came up with is, if we do pack JS in the > > SWCs: > > > >> how > > > >> > many SWCs should there be? For example, right now, for charts, some > > > >>of > > > >> > the charts code is in the FlexJSUI SWC and thus has handwritten JS, > > > >>and a > > > >> > bunch more code is in the FlexJSJX SWC and the JS is generated by > > > >> > cross-compiling the AS. > > > >> > > > > >> > The easiest thing to do right now is simply carve the chart files > > from > > > >> > FlexJSJX into a SWC and the other chart files from FlexJSUI into > > their > > > >> own > > > >> > SWC, but then you have the charting code divided between two SWCs. > > > >>Maybe > > > >> > it is better to try to re-work the build scripts and CompC to put > > all > > > >>the > > > >> > chart code in one SWC. What do others think? > > > >> > > > > >> > Related, we could make lots of small swcs or fewer bigger ones. > > What > > > >>do > > > >> > folks think of that? There could be a SWC for: > > > >> > > > > >> > -Effects > > > >> > -Collections > > > >> > -Binding > > > >> > -Graphics > > > >> > -HTTPService > > > >> > -Charts > > > >> > -Mobile > > > >> > -Formatters > > > >> > -DragDrop > > > >> > -Google Maps > > > >> > -Jquery > > > >> > -CreateJS > > > >> > > > > >> > And, if we actually have two SWCs (one for cross-compiled code, one > > > >>for > > > >> > handwritten JS) that’s a lot of SWCs. > > > >> > > > > >> > Anyway, let me know your thoughts, but I’m thinking that lots of > > SWCs > > > >> > might be the better route. > > > >> > > > > >> > -Alex > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > >
