> Fred, Anything you need help on or questions about the compiler just ask.
Thanks.
> Also, have you seen anything that might suggest we can disable IntelliJ's
> ECMA natives so it uses the JS.swc Object definitions?
AFAIK, you can't switch to another ECMA file, it is hardcoded for the Flex
Plugin, a simple go to definition on Object and you will see the lib it depends
on, in JS, they did it more flexible, not in Flex.
Frédéric THOMAS
----------------------------------------
> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 12:19:16 -0400
> Subject: Re: [FalconJX] Unit test shows full use of pure actionscript to
> javascript compile
> From: teotigraphix...@gmail.com
> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>
> Alex, excuse my ignorance but "what" are your plans for integrating this,
> are you getting the JS.wsc to be built?
>
> Fred, Anything you need help on or questions about the compiler just ask.
>
> Also, have you seen anything that might suggest we can disable IntelliJ's
> ECMA natives so it uses the JS.swc Object definitions?
>
> Mike
>
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Frédéric THOMAS <webdoubl...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>>>So, why to generate the .abc and compare its modify date while we can do
>>>>that with the source file ?
>>>
>>> We would compare source file date against .abc file date and then use the
>>> abc as if it were from a swc and not compile the source file.
>>
>> Can't do more on anything today but will follow that path, indeed I guess
>> I will need yours or Mike's help regarding the compilation itself at some
>> point.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Frédéric THOMAS
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------
>>> From: aha...@adobe.com
>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: [FalconJX] Unit test shows full use of pure actionscript to
>> javascript compile
>>> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 15:48:36 +0000
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6/10/15, 8:36 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <webdoubl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Volunteers are welcome to try to fix it. Or implement a whole new
>>>>> incremental compile strategy. I think I’ve noticed that Java compiler
>>>>> writes out an .class file and uses file dates to determine whether to
>>>>> compile again and seems to do that very quickly. I’ve pondered whether
>>>>> Falcon would get similar gains if we wrote out .abc files.
>>>>
>>>>So, it seems the compiler maintains a kind of session between the
>>>>compilation, how ?
>>>
>>> IIRC, the compiler would checksum public APIs and write it to a temporary
>>> file. The strategy of only re-compiling files affected by public APIs
>>> changed in other files is interesting, but seemed to be buggy.
>>>
>>>>So, why to generate the .abc and compare its modify date while we can do
>>>>that with the source file ?
>>>
>>> We would compare source file date against .abc file date and then use the
>>> abc as if it were from a swc and not compile the source file.
>>>
>>> -Alex
>>>
>>
>>
