Hi Alex,
I get Responder/AsyncToken working with the current code.
But there's a bug:
To make it work I need to comment this part in the example
<!-- <mx:method name="echo">
<mx:arguments>
<symbol>{name_txt.text}</symbol>
</mx:arguments>
</mx:method>
<mx:method name="getObjectArray1">
</mx:method>
<mx:method name="getSomeProduct">
</mx:method> -->
If not I get this when calling the second RO:
[Error] TypeError: undefined is not an object (evaluating
'this.serviceResp.getProperty')
sendEcho (App.js:269)
$EH3 (App.js:321)
(función anónima)
fireListener (events.js:744)
fireListenerOverride (HTMLElementWrapper.js:61)
handleBrowserEvent_ (events.js:870)
(función anónima) (events.js:289)
So I think there's a bug in the compiler when we have two ROs and one of
them has mx:method declared.
El sáb., 13 oct. 2018 a las 9:47, Carlos Rovira (<[email protected]>)
escribió:
> Hi Alex,
>
> thanks, I try it an now it's working :)
>
> El vie., 12 oct. 2018 a las 19:55, Alex Harui (<[email protected]>)
> escribió:
>
>> Hi Carlos,
>>
>> The Maven build for the RO example was using a template and the compiler
>> wasn't using the right variable. In MXRoyale projects the main class name
>> is not the same as the MXML file name because we generate a SystemManager
>> subclass like Flex does.
>>
>> Also, the MXRoyale.swc wasn't including its css file.
>>
>> I've pushed these changes and the sample worked well enough to type in a
>> word and round trip it from the server. It shows up partially under
>> another button right now, but I'm not worrying about that right now.
>>
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 10/12/18, 2:36 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Alex,
>>
>> I see you fixed poms and now all is building correctly in maven in my
>> .m2
>> with 0.9.5-SNAPSHOT. I remove all .m2 artificats to build from a clean
>> state. Thanks, since all is now more clear.
>>
>> When I tried to run the MX RO example build with maven it fails with
>> this:
>>
>> TypeError: null is not an object (evaluating 'viewBead.beforeLayout')
>> dispatchEvent — EventDispatcher.js:74
>> dispatchEvent — HTMLElementWrapper.js:245:86
>> setWidth — UIBase.js:136
>> set__width — UIBase.js:703
>> initializeStrandBasedObject — MXMLDataInterpreter.js:195
>> generateMXMLArray — MXMLDataInterpreter.js:125
>> generateMXMLInstances — MXMLDataInterpreter.js:266
>> createChildren — Container.js:139
>> createChildren — Application.js:112
>> initialize — UIComponent.js:647
>> addedToParent — UIComponent.js:267
>> addedToParent — Container.js:126
>> addElement — UIBase.js:414
>> addChild — SystemManager.js:107
>> initializeTopLevelWindow — SystemManager.js:237
>> start — SystemManager.js:223
>> Código global — index.html:572
>>
>> I saw this kind of fail in the other mx examples build with maven.
>> What
>> could be the difference since ANT build seems to work, but MAVEN
>> build not.
>> Maybe some config to take into account for MX example projects?
>>
>> thanks
>>
>>
>>
>> El vie., 12 oct. 2018 a las 0:28, Carlos Rovira (<
>> [email protected]>)
>> escribió:
>>
>> > Hi Alex,
>> >
>> > I'm fixing version numbers in maven projects and when all is set to
>> > 0.9.5-SNAPSHOT, the error I announced up in this thread comes again:
>> >
>> > [*INFO*] *--- *royale-maven-plugin:0.9.5-SNAPSHOT:compile-as
>> > *(default-compile-as)* @ MXRoyale* ---*
>> >
>> > [*INFO*] Executing COMPC in tool group Royale with args:
>> >
>> [-load-config=/Users/carlosrovira/Dev/Royale/Source/royale-asjs/frameworks/projects/MXRoyale/target/compile-swf-config.xml,
>> > -js-compiler-define=COMPILE::JS,true,
>> > -js-compiler-define=COMPILE::SWF,false,
>> > -js-compiler-define=GOOG::DEBUG,goog.DEBUG,
>> > -js-compiler-define=ROYALE::DISPLAYOBJECT,IUIComponent,
>> > -compiler.targets=SWF,JSRoyale, -compiler.strict-xml=true]
>> >
>> > args:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> -load-config=/Users/carlosrovira/Dev/Royale/Source/royale-asjs/frameworks/projects/MXRoyale/target/compile-swf-config.xml
>> >
>> > -js-compiler-define=COMPILE::JS,true
>> >
>> > -js-compiler-define=COMPILE::SWF,false
>> >
>> > -js-compiler-define=GOOG::DEBUG,goog.DEBUG
>> >
>> > -js-compiler-define=ROYALE::DISPLAYOBJECT,IUIComponent
>> >
>> > -compiler.targets=SWF,JSRoyale
>> >
>> > -compiler.strict-xml=true
>> >
>> > target:SWF
>> >
>> > target:JSRoyale
>> >
>> > COMPC
>> >
>> > Loading configuration:
>> >
>> /Users/carlosrovira/Dev/Royale/Source/royale-asjs/frameworks/projects/MXRoyale/target/compile-swf-config.xml
>> >
>> >
>> > Error: Unexpected exception 'java.lang.NullPointerException'.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Unexpected exception 'java.lang.NullPointerException'.
>> >
>> > You're not getting it due to a fake compilation that makes asjs use
>> 0.9.4
>> > compiler and not 0.9.5 (the current code)
>> >
>> > As I stated before in the start release thread, we should stabilize
>> the
>> > repo to avoid much confusion.
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> >
>> > Carlos
>> >
>> >
>> > El jue., 11 oct. 2018 a las 23:55, Carlos Rovira (<
>> [email protected]>)
>> > escribió:
>> >
>> >> Ok Alex,
>> >>
>> >> I'm trying to create a basic test with Jewel and MX RO. First
>> problem I
>> >> get is that "symbol" tag inside mx:arguments is not recognized
>> >>
>> >> This tag could not be resolved to an ActionScript class. It will be
>> >> ignored.
>> >>
>> >> Maybe it's only recognized in MX environment? if so could it be
>> enhanced
>> >> to be valid in Jewel?
>> >>
>> >> In the other hand, I wasn't able to build mxroyale example RO with
>> maven.
>> >> Only can be build with ANT, don't know why.
>> >>
>> >> thanks
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> El jue., 11 oct. 2018 a las 18:48, Alex Harui
>> (<[email protected]>)
>> >> escribió:
>> >>
>> >>> I don't think RemoteObject is a bead. See the example at
>> >>> examples/mxroyale/RemoteObjectAMFTest.
>> >>>
>> >>> I got the ServerConfig error as well but it didn't seem to affect
>> the
>> >>> example's bin/js-debug version.
>> >>>
>> >>> You might want to actually build your test setup with Flex so you
>> know
>> >>> it "will" work. For example, you did not show any of your code
>> that setup
>> >>> an Operation called "someMethod" so the error you got would be
>> expected
>> >>> even in Flex.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks,
>> >>> -Alex
>> >>>
>> >>> On 10/11/18, 4:47 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Hi Alex,
>> >>>
>> >>> I tried to use MX RO but doesn't work. Here's what the info
>> of this
>> >>> test:
>> >>>
>> >>> Code:
>> >>>
>> >>> to make a quick test I put this code to run at "initComplete"
>> event:
>> >>>
>> >>> private function prepareChannelSet(event:Event):void
>> >>> {
>> >>> var amfEndpoint:String = "
>> >>> http://localhost:8080/webapp/messagebroker/my-amf";;
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> var channelSet:ChannelSet = new ChannelSet();
>> >>> var channel:AMFChannel = new AMFChannel("my-amf",
>> amfEndpoint);
>> >>> channelSet.addChannel(channel);
>> >>> service.channelSet = channelSet;
>> >>> }
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> I add the MX RO as a bead
>> >>>
>> >>> <j:beads>
>> >>> <mx:RemoteObject id="service"
>> >>> result="onResult(event)"
>> >>> fault="onFault(event)"
>> >>> destination = "myDestination"/>
>> >>> </j:beads>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> After compilation (successful) I get the following trace that
>> should
>> >>> be
>> >>> fixed:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> */Users/carlosrovira/Dev/Codeoscopic/Source/sgc/webapp/src/main/webapp/javascript/bin/js-debug/App.js*
>> >>> *end of list of source files*
>> >>> *oct 11, 2018 1:33:04 PM
>> >>> com.google.javascript.jscomp.LoggerErrorManager
>> >>> println*
>> >>> *ADVERTENCIA:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> /Users/carlosrovira/Dev/Codeoscopic/Source/sgc/webapp/src/main/webapp/javascript/bin/js-debug/mx/rpc/remoting/Operation.js:103:
>> >>> WARNING - Bad type annotation. extra @override/@inheritDoc
>> tag. See
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fgoogle%2Fclosure-compiler%2Fwiki%2FBad-Type-Annotation&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C38d763fac8cd4ff5854708d6302623da%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636749337710149237&sdata=1Ho7%2F94bNwrRXA%2FcjLzX3l58NvQlQW5cn4YWp3xIAcY%3D&reserved=0
>> >>> <
>> >>>
>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fgoogle%2Fclosure-compiler%2Fwiki%2FBad-Type-Annotation&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C38d763fac8cd4ff5854708d6302623da%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636749337710149237&sdata=1Ho7%2F94bNwrRXA%2FcjLzX3l58NvQlQW5cn4YWp3xIAcY%3D&reserved=0
>> >
>> >>> for
>> >>> more information.*
>> >>> * * @override*
>> >>> * ^*
>> >>>
>> >>> *oct 11, 2018 1:33:04 PM
>> >>> com.google.javascript.jscomp.LoggerErrorManager
>> >>> println*
>> >>> *ADVERTENCIA:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> /Users/carlosrovira/Dev/Codeoscopic/Source/sgc/webapp/src/main/webapp/javascript/bin/js-debug/mx/rpc/remoting/Operation.js:150:
>> >>> WARNING - Bad type annotation. extra @override/@inheritDoc
>> tag. See
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fgoogle%2Fclosure-compiler%2Fwiki%2FBad-Type-Annotation&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C38d763fac8cd4ff5854708d6302623da%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636749337710149237&sdata=1Ho7%2F94bNwrRXA%2FcjLzX3l58NvQlQW5cn4YWp3xIAcY%3D&reserved=0
>> >>> <
>> >>>
>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fgoogle%2Fclosure-compiler%2Fwiki%2FBad-Type-Annotation&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C38d763fac8cd4ff5854708d6302623da%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636749337710149237&sdata=1Ho7%2F94bNwrRXA%2FcjLzX3l58NvQlQW5cn4YWp3xIAcY%3D&reserved=0
>> >
>> >>> for
>> >>> more information.*
>> >>> * * @override*
>> >>> * ^*
>> >>>
>> >>> *oct 11, 2018 1:33:04 PM
>> >>> com.google.javascript.jscomp.LoggerErrorManager
>> >>> println*
>> >>> *GRAVE:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> /Users/carlosrovira/Dev/Codeoscopic/Source/sgc/webapp/src/main/webapp/javascript/bin/js-debug/mx/messaging/config/ServerConfig.js:333:
>> >>> ERROR - Parse error. invalid assignment target*
>> >>> *
>> >>> mx.messaging.config.ServerConfig["xml"].child("default-channels")
>> =
>> >>> newServices.child("default-channels");*
>> >>> *
>> >>> ^*
>> >>>
>> >>> *oct 11, 2018 1:33:04 PM
>> >>> com.google.javascript.jscomp.LoggerErrorManager
>> >>> printSummary*
>> >>> *ADVERTENCIA: 1 error(s), 2 warning(s)*
>> >>> *The project 'App' has been successfully compiled and
>> optimized.*
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Then the problems at Runtime. Trying to call a method in the
>> service
>> >>> like
>> >>> this:
>> >>>
>> >>> *service.someMethod(someParam);*
>> >>>
>> >>> I get in browser console this error:
>> >>>
>> >>> *TypeError: this.service.someMethod is not a function. (In
>> >>> 'this.service.someMethod(someParam)',
>> 'this.service.someMethod' is
>> >>> undefined)*
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Congratulations, I you are mostly at 99% to get official MX
>> >>> RemoteObject
>> >>> working :)
>> >>>
>> >>> Carlos
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> El jue., 11 oct. 2018 a las 12:41, Carlos Rovira (<
>> >>> [email protected]>)
>> >>> escribió:
>> >>>
>> >>> > Hi Alex,
>> >>> >
>> >>> > strangely, now build is passing locally...can't figure why
>> >>> yesterday it
>> >>> > was failing...maybe part of the build was in the change of
>> day at
>> >>> > 00:00...just speculating..
>> >>> >
>> >>> > I'll try to put mx RO to work and see I see and report :)
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > El jue., 11 oct. 2018 a las 12:18, Carlos Rovira (<
>> >>> [email protected]>)
>> >>> > escribió:
>> >>> >
>> >>> >> Hi Alex,
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> yes, I always compile first compiler, then typedefs and
>> last
>> >>> asjs.
>> >>> >> I'll try again. Maybe the maven-prepare-release could be
>> doing
>> >>> making
>> >>> >> some problem with the change of version 0.9.4 to 0.9.5?
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> El jue., 11 oct. 2018 a las 9:30, Alex Harui
>> >>> (<[email protected]>)
>> >>> >> escribió:
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> I can't reproduce the failure. It worked on builds.a.o as
>> >>> well. Did
>> >>> >>> you run mvn on the compiler first?
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> -Alex
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> On 10/10/18, 4:38 PM, "Carlos Rovira" <
>> [email protected]>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> I must close for today, tomorrow will try to change
>> net RO
>> >>> for mx RO
>> >>> >>> if you
>> >>> >>> finally get this build error fixed.
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> Thanks
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> Carlos
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> El mié., 10 oct. 2018 a las 23:34, Carlos Rovira (<
>> >>> >>> [email protected]>)
>> >>> >>> escribió:
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> > That's great Alex! :)
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > I want to try it but I found the following error
>> building
>> >>> with
>> >>> >>> maven:
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > [*INFO*] *----------------<
>> >>> *org.apache.royale.framework:MXRoyale*
>> >>> >>> > >----------------*
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > [*INFO*] *Building Apache Royale: Framework: Libs:
>> MXRoyale
>> >>> >>> > 0.9.4-SNAPSHOT [32/118]*
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > [*INFO*] *--------------------------------[ swc
>> >>> >>> > ]---------------------------------*
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > [*INFO*]
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > [*INFO*] *--- *maven-clean-plugin:3.0.0:clean
>> >>> *(default-clean)* @
>> >>> >>> MXRoyale*
>> >>> >>> > ---*
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > [*INFO*]
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > [*INFO*] *---
>> >>> *royale-maven-plugin:0.9.4-SNAPSHOT:generate-extern
>> >>> >>> > *(default-generate-extern)* @ MXRoyale* ---*
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > [*INFO*]
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > [*INFO*] *---
>> *maven-remote-resources-plugin:1.5:process
>> >>> >>> > *(process-resource-bundles)* @ MXRoyale* ---*
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > [*INFO*]
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > [*INFO*] *--- *maven-resources-plugin:2.7:resources
>> >>> >>> *(default-resources)*
>> >>> >>> > @ MXRoyale* ---*
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > [*INFO*] Using 'UTF-8' encoding to copy filtered
>> resources.
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > [*INFO*] Copying 3 resources
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > [*INFO*] Copying 3 resources
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > [*INFO*]
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > [*INFO*] *---
>> >>> *royale-maven-plugin:0.9.4-SNAPSHOT:compile-as
>> >>> >>> > *(default-compile-as)* @ MXRoyale* ---*
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > [*INFO*] Executing COMPC in tool group Royale with
>> args:
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>>
>> >>>
>> [-load-config=/Users/carlosrovira/Dev/Royale/Source/royale-asjs/frameworks/projects/MXRoyale/target/compile-swf-config.xml,
>> >>> >>> > -js-compiler-define=COMPILE::JS,true,
>> >>> >>> > -js-compiler-define=COMPILE::SWF,false,
>> >>> >>> > -js-compiler-define=GOOG::DEBUG,goog.DEBUG,
>> >>> >>> >
>> -js-compiler-define=ROYALE::DISPLAYOBJECT,IUIComponent,
>> >>> >>> > -compiler.targets=SWF,JSRoyale,
>> -compiler.strict-xml=true]
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > args:
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>>
>> >>>
>> -load-config=/Users/carlosrovira/Dev/Royale/Source/royale-asjs/frameworks/projects/MXRoyale/target/compile-swf-config.xml
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > -js-compiler-define=COMPILE::JS,true
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > -js-compiler-define=COMPILE::SWF,false
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > -js-compiler-define=GOOG::DEBUG,goog.DEBUG
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> -js-compiler-define=ROYALE::DISPLAYOBJECT,IUIComponent
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > -compiler.targets=SWF,JSRoyale
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > -compiler.strict-xml=true
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > target:SWF
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > target:JSRoyale
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > COMPC
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > Loading configuration:
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>>
>> >>>
>> /Users/carlosrovira/Dev/Royale/Source/royale-asjs/frameworks/projects/MXRoyale/target/compile-swf-config.xml
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > Error: Unexpected exception
>> >>> 'java.lang.NullPointerException'.
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > Unexpected exception
>> 'java.lang.NullPointerException'.
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > ...
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > [*INFO*] Apache Royale: Framework: Libs: RoyaleSite
>> >>> .........
>> >>> >>> *SUCCESS*
>> >>> >>> > [ 0.771 s]
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > [*INFO*] Apache Royale: Framework: Libs: MXRoyale
>> >>> ...........
>> >>> >>> *FAILURE*
>> >>> >>> > [ 1.529 s]
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > [*INFO*] Apache Royale: Framework: Libs: Icons
>> >>> ..............
>> >>> >>> *SKIPPED*
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > [*INFO*] Apache Royale: Framework: Libs: SparkRoyale
>> >>> ........
>> >>> >>> *SKIPPED*
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > I'm trying to build with the 2 commits of the latest
>> >>> failed release
>> >>> >>> > reverted to build 0.9.4. (I think we should revert
>> those
>> >>> since, I
>> >>> >>> suppose
>> >>> >>> > are not valid now).
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > Thanks
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > El mié., 10 oct. 2018 a las 21:41, Alex Harui
>> >>> >>> (<[email protected]>)
>> >>> >>> > escribió:
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >> We especially want the RemoteObject in Network.swc
>> to be
>> >>> PAYG. MX
>> >>> >>> >> RemoteObject was never PAYG.
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> Having looked at the code more, I see what you are
>> saying
>> >>> about
>> >>> >>> Operation
>> >>> >>> >> not having its own fault and result handlers. It
>> looks
>> >>> like
>> >>> >>> there already
>> >>> >>> >> is a SimpleOperation, so Operation could introduce
>> its
>> >>> own fault
>> >>> >>> and result
>> >>> >>> >> handlers.
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> FWIW, I just pushed the changes to the compiler and
>> >>> emulation
>> >>> >>> code that
>> >>> >>> >> got MX RemoteObject to work. So that could be an
>> option
>> >>> for
>> >>> >>> you. I'm sure
>> >>> >>> >> there might be bugs remaining to be fixed, but
>> there is
>> >>> quite a
>> >>> >>> bit of old
>> >>> >>> >> Flex code that is now running pretty much
>> unchanged.
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> -Alex
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> On 10/10/18, 2:33 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
>> >>> [email protected]>
>> >>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> Hi Alex
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> El mar., 9 oct. 2018 a las 18:14, Alex Harui
>> >>> >>> >> (<[email protected]>)
>> >>> >>> >> escribió:
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> > As long as Responders are PAYG and not baked
>> into
>> >>> the basic
>> >>> >>> RO
>> >>> >>> >> > implementation, it is fine for others to try
>> to
>> >>> replicate
>> >>> >>> subsets
>> >>> >>> >> of MX
>> >>> >>> >> > RemoteObject, but it still seems like
>> duplication
>> >>> of effort.
>> >>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> well, I'm talking not about MX RO, bur the
>> current
>> >>> one we
>> >>> >>> have in
>> >>> >>> >> Network.swc that is working.
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> That means is not a duplicate effort, take into
>> >>> account that
>> >>> >>> I'm
>> >>> >>> >> right now
>> >>> >>> >> coding a real world Apache Royale application,
>> and
>> >>> need to
>> >>> >>> get the
>> >>> >>> >> work
>> >>> >>> >> done. I expect this could be a win for this
>> project
>> >>> since is
>> >>> >>> an
>> >>> >>> >> important
>> >>> >>> >> project and an important client that are
>> betting for
>> >>> Apache
>> >>> >>> Royale :).
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >>> >> > That said, I have not used RO or Responders
>> in any
>> >>> real
>> >>> >>> world
>> >>> >>> >> application
>> >>> >>> >> > myself. I'm not sure I understand the need
>> for
>> >>> them vs
>> >>> >>> just adding
>> >>> >>> >> more
>> >>> >>> >> > listeners to the result and fault event.
>> >>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> Each RO use to have several Operations (aka
>> methods
>> >>> that we
>> >>> >>> want to
>> >>> >>> >> call in
>> >>> >>> >> the backend). In real world scenarios, we want
>> each RO
>> >>> >>> callback logic
>> >>> >>> >> will
>> >>> >>> >> be unique. If I call a service for a user
>> list, I
>> >>> want to
>> >>> >>> fill the
>> >>> >>> >> list in
>> >>> >>> >> royale, but if I want to ask for a concrete
>> user
>> >>> data, I want
>> >>> >>> to fill
>> >>> >>> >> a
>> >>> >>> >> form with that data.
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> Now, all Operations will be throw a result
>> event and
>> >>> therefor
>> >>> >>> all
>> >>> >>> >> listeners
>> >>> >>> >> will fire, executing all methods. With
>> listeners, we
>> >>> can use
>> >>> >>> >> if-then-else
>> >>> >>> >> to and some logic to execute parts of the
>> listener,
>> >>> but a
>> >>> >>> Responder
>> >>> >>> >> implementation, should make the appropriate
>> responder
>> >>> be
>> >>> >>> executed.
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> In order to structure and organizar a real
>> world
>> >>> application
>> >>> >>> that is
>> >>> >>> >> a bit
>> >>> >>> >> complex this is needed to separate all this
>> logic
>> >>> across
>> >>> >>> files.
>> >>> >>> >> (In a tiny application, you can use the
>> if-then-else
>> >>> approach
>> >>> >>> since
>> >>> >>> >> is more
>> >>> >>> >> like a example).
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >>> >> > My 2 cents,
>> >>> >>> >> > -Alex
>> >>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >>> >> > On 10/9/18, 3:46 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
>> >>> >>> [email protected]>
>> >>> >>> >> wrote:
>> >>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >>> >> > Hi Piotr,
>> >>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >>> >> > I think if I get some improvement over
>> the
>> >>> current RO
>> >>> >>> with
>> >>> >>> >> Responders
>> >>> >>> >> > that
>> >>> >>> >> > could go to develop. Other thing is I
>> tried to
>> >>> make it
>> >>> >>> work in
>> >>> >>> >> mx RO.
>> >>> >>> >> > People using Royale RO will benefit from
>> it. If
>> >>> some
>> >>> >>> day mx RO
>> >>> >>> >> is
>> >>> >>> >> > ready, I
>> >>> >>> >> > think we'll shift to mx RO, although
>> royale RO
>> >>> could be
>> >>> >>> >> continue to be
>> >>> >>> >> > valid (since is a small implementation
>> that
>> >>> works), or
>> >>> >>> we could
>> >>> >>> >> decide
>> >>> >>> >> > deprecate it. Anyway, I'm not talking to
>> make
>> >>> >>> improvements over
>> >>> >>> >> > something
>> >>> >>> >> > that others will evolve separately, I
>> want to
>> >>> improve
>> >>> >>> something
>> >>> >>> >> that
>> >>> >>> >> > otherwise will remain as is.
>> >>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >>> >> > El mar., 9 oct. 2018 a las 12:39, Piotr
>> >>> Zarzycki (<
>> >>> >>> >> > [email protected]>)
>> >>> >>> >> > escribió:
>> >>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >>> >> > > Carlos,
>> >>> >>> >> > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > You can always use branch, make your
>> changes
>> >>> and wait
>> >>> >>> for the
>> >>> >>> >> proper
>> >>> >>> >> > one
>> >>> >>> >> > > using branch. Some time ago Harbs did
>> it the
>> >>> same as
>> >>> >>> far as I
>> >>> >>> >> > remember.
>> >>> >>> >> > > There is no need to wait if you need
>> >>> something ASAP.
>> >>> >>> >> > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > Thanks,
>> >>> >>> >> > > Piotr
>> >>> >>> >> > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > wt., 9 paź 2018 o 12:36 Carlos Rovira <
>> >>> >>> >> [email protected]>
>> >>> >>> >> > > napisał(a):
>> >>> >>> >> > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > Hi Alex,
>> >>> >>> >> > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > since there's no planned ETA for
>> anyone
>> >>> here (that
>> >>> >>> I know),
>> >>> >>> >> I
>> >>> >>> >> > could try
>> >>> >>> >> > > at
>> >>> >>> >> > > > some point to have a minimal
>> Responder
>> >>> >>> functionality in the
>> >>> >>> >> current
>> >>> >>> >> > > working
>> >>> >>> >> > > > RO. Does not have sense to duplicate
>> all
>> >>> the code
>> >>> >>> but I
>> >>> >>> >> think has
>> >>> >>> >> > sense
>> >>> >>> >> > > to
>> >>> >>> >> > > > see if some little changes can
>> provide the
>> >>> minimal
>> >>> >>> needs.
>> >>> >>> >> > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > thanks
>> >>> >>> >> > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > El mar., 9 oct. 2018 a las 0:25,
>> Alex Harui
>> >>> >>> >> > (<[email protected]>)
>> >>> >>> >> > > > escribió:
>> >>> >>> >> > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > I think you'll have to wait until
>> someone
>> >>> gets
>> >>> >>> all of the
>> >>> >>> >> old
>> >>> >>> >> > Flex RO
>> >>> >>> >> > > > code
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > to compile and run. I'm currently
>> still
>> >>> >>> debugging the
>> >>> >>> >> compiler,
>> >>> >>> >> > so no
>> >>> >>> >> > > > way
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > it will be ready tomorrow.
>> >>> >>> >> > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > It doesn't make sense to try to
>> duplicate
>> >>> all of
>> >>> >>> this
>> >>> >>> >> code and
>> >>> >>> >> > get it
>> >>> >>> >> > > to
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > work some other way.
>> >>> >>> >> > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > -Alex
>> >>> >>> >> > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > On 10/8/18, 3:21 PM, "Carlos
>> Rovira" <
>> >>> >>> >> [email protected]>
>> >>> >>> >> > wrote:
>> >>> >>> >> > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > Hi Alex,
>> >>> >>> >> > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > I'm closing for today, but
>> tomorrow
>> >>> I'll need
>> >>> >>> to
>> >>> >>> >> handle more
>> >>> >>> >> > than
>> >>> >>> >> > > one
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > Responder for RemoteObject
>> calls, so
>> >>> each
>> >>> >>> >> operation/method
>> >>> >>> >> > can have
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > it's
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > own responder and create
>> methods for
>> >>> each one
>> >>> >>> in my
>> >>> >>> >> > controllers.
>> >>> >>> >> > > with
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > the
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > current RemoteObject
>> implementation
>> >>> could you
>> >>> >>> share
>> >>> >>> >> what
>> >>> >>> >> > could be
>> >>> >>> >> > > the
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > most
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > quick and easy way to get this
>> while
>> >>> the full
>> >>> >>> RO
>> >>> >>> >> > implementation is
>> >>> >>> >> > > on
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > the
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > works? Now that I'm starting
>> to grow
>> >>> the app
>> >>> >>> code
>> >>> >>> >> base I can
>> >>> >>> >> > rely
>> >>> >>> >> > > on
>> >>> >>> >> > > > a
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > result handler full of
>> if-then-else
>> >>> >>> >> > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > Thanks for any help on this
>> >>> >>> >> > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > Carlos
>> >>> >>> >> > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > El lun., 8 oct. 2018 a las
>> 18:52,
>> >>> Carlos
>> >>> >>> Rovira (<
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > [email protected]>)
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > escribió:
>> >>> >>> >> > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > > Ok Alex, thanks, didn't know
>> that
>> >>> you have
>> >>> >>> this
>> >>> >>> >> task to
>> >>> >>> >> > make it
>> >>> >>> >> > > > work
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > RO. I
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > > though you only try to
>> compile it.
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > > That's good to know. I'm
>> trying
>> >>> right now
>> >>> >>> to make a
>> >>> >>> >> real
>> >>> >>> >> > world
>> >>> >>> >> > > app
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > and
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > > since I don't have a micro
>> >>> structural IOC
>> >>> >>> framework
>> >>> >>> >> like
>> >>> >>> >> > Swiz,
>> >>> >>> >> > > that
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > was
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > > that I use in Flex, I'm
>> trying to
>> >>> structure
>> >>> >>> and
>> >>> >>> >> organize
>> >>> >>> >> > screens,
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > > controllers, delegates, and
>> so on,
>> >>> and I'm
>> >>> >>> trying
>> >>> >>> >> to put
>> >>> >>> >> > things
>> >>> >>> >> > > as
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > easy as
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > > possible so I can refactor
>> more
>> >>> later to
>> >>> >>> something
>> >>> >>> >> more
>> >>> >>> >> > suited
>> >>> >>> >> > > for
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > this
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > > task, since I don't have
>> time now
>> >>> to build a
>> >>> >>> >> framework for
>> >>> >>> >> > this
>> >>> >>> >> > > due
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > to
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > > reduced time lines.
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > > If you get this RO proxy way
>> to
>> >>> call backend
>> >>> >>> >> methods and
>> >>> >>> >> > > > AsyncToken,
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > > that's what I need to
>> connect with
>> >>> MX
>> >>> >>> RemoteObject
>> >>> >>> >> in the
>> >>> >>> >> > same
>> >>> >>> >> > > way
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > we use
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > > to do.
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > > I'll be waiting for your.
>> progress
>> >>> there
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > > thanks
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > > Carlos
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > > El lun., 8 oct. 2018 a las
>> 17:28,
>> >>> Alex Harui
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > (<[email protected]>)
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > > escribió:
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> I believe I already said I
>> am
>> >>> working on
>> >>> >>> >> RemoteObject.
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> The Flex compiler generates
>> custom
>> >>> code for
>> >>> >>> >> > mx:RemoteObject.
>> >>> >>> >> > > The
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > Royale
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> Compiler currently does
>> not. I am
>> >>> working
>> >>> >>> on it.
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> Thanks,
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> -Alex
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> On 10/8/18, 3:13 AM, "Carlos
>> >>> Rovira" <
>> >>> >>> >> > [email protected]>
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > wrote:
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> Hi,
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> I was experimenting
>> trying to
>> >>> get
>> >>> >>> RemoteObject
>> >>> >>> >> to
>> >>> >>> >> > proxy
>> >>> >>> >> > > method
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > calls.
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> so instead of doing
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> service.send("echo",
>> >>> [name_txt.text]);
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> be able to do:
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> service.echo(name_txt.text);
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> I tried with Proxy class
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> (org.apache.royale.utils.Proxy)
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> and implementing
>> >>> IEventDispatcher, but
>> >>> >>> >> compiler throws
>> >>> >>> >> > > error:
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> Call to a possibly
>> undefined
>> >>> method
>> >>> >>> echo
>> >>> >>> >> through a
>> >>> >>> >> > reference
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > with
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> static
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> type RemoteObject.
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> It's possible to do
>> something
>> >>> like
>> >>> >>> this? what
>> >>> >>> >> I'm
>> >>> >>> >> > missing?
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> This seems a little
>> >>> enhancement, but
>> >>> >>> it would
>> >>> >>> >> be cool
>> >>> >>> >> > if we
>> >>> >>> >> > > > get
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > it in
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> order
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> to be more near of the
>> normal
>> >>> syntax
>> >>> >>> we all
>> >>> >>> >> have in
>> >>> >>> >> > our code
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > bases.
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> thanks
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> --
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> Carlos Rovira
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> >>> >>> >> > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > >
>> >>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>>
>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C38d763fac8cd4ff5854708d6302623da%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636749337710149237&sdata=T7fF2NThMNtDtM6Y9KH5uZp0g0nBlRvamXQ1rOVlPHo%3D&reserved=0
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >>
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > > --
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > > Carlos Rovira
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > >
>> >>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>>
>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C38d763fac8cd4ff5854708d6302623da%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636749337710149237&sdata=T7fF2NThMNtDtM6Y9KH5uZp0g0nBlRvamXQ1rOVlPHo%3D&reserved=0
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > >
>> >>> >>> >> > > > >
>
>
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira
>
>
--
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira
