File a bug with a test case. -Alex
On 10/13/18, 2:27 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <carlosrov...@apache.org> wrote: 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 (<carlosrov...@apache.org>) escribió: > Hi Alex, > > thanks, I try it an now it's working :) > > El vie., 12 oct. 2018 a las 19:55, Alex Harui (<aha...@adobe.com.invalid>) > 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" <carlosrov...@apache.org> 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 (< >> carlosrov...@apache.org>) >> 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 (< >> carlosrov...@apache.org>) >> > 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 >> (<aha...@adobe.com.invalid>) >> >> 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" <carlosrov...@apache.org> >> 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%7C50fd7c77193d4b60581608d630ee0cfd%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636750196330124750&sdata=jlpUz9IuKgfrT%2F3L6yg8yBv2feYeKCuPKFmiYajLO3g%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%7C50fd7c77193d4b60581608d630ee0cfd%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636750196330124750&sdata=jlpUz9IuKgfrT%2F3L6yg8yBv2feYeKCuPKFmiYajLO3g%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%7C50fd7c77193d4b60581608d630ee0cfd%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636750196330124750&sdata=jlpUz9IuKgfrT%2F3L6yg8yBv2feYeKCuPKFmiYajLO3g%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%7C50fd7c77193d4b60581608d630ee0cfd%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636750196330124750&sdata=jlpUz9IuKgfrT%2F3L6yg8yBv2feYeKCuPKFmiYajLO3g%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 (< >> >>> carlosrov...@apache.org>) >> >>> 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 (< >> >>> carlosrov...@apache.org>) >> >>> > 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 >> >>> (<aha...@adobe.com.invalid>) >> >>> >> 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" < >> carlosrov...@apache.org> >> >>> 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 (< >> >>> >>> carlosrov...@apache.org>) >> >>> >>> 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 >> >>> >>> (<aha...@adobe.com.invalid>) >> >>> >>> > 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" < >> >>> carlosrov...@apache.org> >> >>> >>> wrote: >> >>> >>> >> >> >>> >>> >> Hi Alex >> >>> >>> >> >> >>> >>> >> El mar., 9 oct. 2018 a las 18:14, Alex Harui >> >>> >>> >> (<aha...@adobe.com.invalid>) >> >>> >>> >> 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" < >> >>> >>> carlosrov...@apache.org> >> >>> >>> >> 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 (< >> >>> >>> >> > piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>) >> >>> >>> >> > 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 < >> >>> >>> >> carlosrov...@apache.org> >> >>> >>> >> > > 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 >> >>> >>> >> > (<aha...@adobe.com.invalid>) >> >>> >>> >> > > > 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" < >> >>> >>> >> carlosrov...@apache.org> >> >>> >>> >> > 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 (< >> >>> >>> >> > > > > carlosrov...@apache.org>) >> >>> >>> >> > > > > 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 >> >>> >>> >> > > > > (<aha...@adobe.com.invalid>) >> >>> >>> >> > > > > > 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" < >> >>> >>> >> > carlosrov...@apache.org> >> >>> >>> >> > > > > 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%7C50fd7c77193d4b60581608d630ee0cfd%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636750196330134764&sdata=WB3QFeglFG58en0PmVSjXngqEOxnPLSNFPtOuqdPfcA%3D&reserved=0 >> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> >> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> >> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> >> >>> >>> >> > > > > > >> >>> >>> >> > > > > > -- >> >>> >>> >> > > > > > Carlos Rovira >> >>> >>> >> > > > > > >> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> >>> >> > > > >> >>> >>> >> > > >> >>> >>> >> > >> >>> >>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C50fd7c77193d4b60581608d630ee0cfd%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636750196330134764&sdata=WB3QFeglFG58en0PmVSjXngqEOxnPLSNFPtOuqdPfcA%3D&reserved=0 >> >>> >>> >> > > > > > >> >>> >>> >> > > > > > >> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> >>> >> > > > > > > > > -- > Carlos Rovira > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C50fd7c77193d4b60581608d630ee0cfd%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636750196330134764&sdata=WB3QFeglFG58en0PmVSjXngqEOxnPLSNFPtOuqdPfcA%3D&reserved=0 > > -- Carlos Rovira https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C50fd7c77193d4b60581608d630ee0cfd%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636750196330134764&sdata=WB3QFeglFG58en0PmVSjXngqEOxnPLSNFPtOuqdPfcA%3D&reserved=0