If you have an app using XML with non-default XML namespaces, how do you write
the code without using QName? If it is true that QName is rarely needed, then
your plan becomes more reasonable. And we could flip the inheritance where
QName extends XMLQName and the signatures in XML take XMLQName. It should be
even more rare for QNames to be used in Royale since more things should be
public and not hidden in some custom namespace.
I think QName can only be used outside of XML in bracket syntax. If that's
wrong, hopefully someone will tell us why.
-Alex
On 12/29/18, 9:16 AM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
The flag idea sounds promising.
As far as XMLQName goes, I was thinking that it would subclass Name and the
method signatures would still use Name. I don’t think it’s very common to
actually create a QName, so that would likely work.
Of course having the overhead of a subclass every time a QName is
constructed is not ideal.
My $0.02,
Harbs
> On Dec 29, 2018, at 9:26 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> wrote:
>
> Well, I don't think we want to require folks to use XMLQName in their
code. However, your idea of ClassQName made me think that maybe we can have
the compiler set a flag on the QName whenever it is used in bracket syntax on
non-XML. I will try to remember to try that next week.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 12/28/18, 2:17 AM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Gotcha.
>
> I think the simplest solution is to replace Name with XMLQName for
XML. The other similar option is to create a ClassQName that the compiler would
use instead of QName for namespaces in classes.
>
>> On Dec 28, 2018, at 10:32 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID>
wrote:
>>
>> Most URIs in QNames have something like:
"library://ns.adobe.com/mx/core/internal". That is not a legal JavaScript
property name. IOW, you can't run:
>>
>> someObject.library://ns.adobe.com/mx/core/internal::foo = 1;
>>
>> So, we used to output bracket syntax:
>>
>> someObject["library://ns.adobe.com/mx/core/internal::foo"] = 1;
>>
>> For getter/setters, this meant that the Object.defineProperties had
entries like:
>>
>> { "library://ns.adobe.com/mx/core/internal::foo": {get: ... }}
>>
>> And Closure started choking on it, so now we replace the "/", "." and
":" with "$" or "_" to make it a legal JavaScript property name so we don't
have to use quotes and brackets.
>>
>> But if you use a QName in property access outside of XML, the JavaScript
runtime calls QName.toString(), so it also has to return a string with the same
character replacements so it matches. So what are the implications of doing
that? I think inside of XML, we could test for QName and use QName.match
and/or use the unmodified URI. Currently, the QName stores the original URI,
only toString() does the character replacements. But if someone has
expectations on what QName.toString() returns, then that might cause issues.
>>
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 12/27/18, 11:28 PM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> What are we modifying with the URI?
>>
>>> On Dec 28, 2018, at 2:33 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID>
wrote:
>>>
>>> Yeah, that's the sort of thing I was concerned about. XML does call
QName.toString() but it doesn't seem to actually care too much about what comes
back. In toXMLName it takes whatever name is and calls toString() on it. The
QName.toString() is different between SWF and JS. It is only in JS that we
modify the uri to be a valid JS property name. We used to use bracket syntax,
but that's what ClosureCompiler is choking on.
>>>
>>> The question is what does someone do with myXML.name().toString()? Are
they matching it up against a URI? They should be calling QName.match().
>>>
>>> I couldn't immediately think of a way for QName to know it is being
used for XML vs other properties. We could create an XMLQName class for JS to
return from name() that doesn't modify the URI.
>>>
>>> -Alex
>>>
>>> On 12/27/18, 1:04 PM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I don’t think we’re using toString() anywhere ourselves, but what
happens if someone has myXML.name().toString()? (Or an implicit cast) Will this
break their Flash code?
>>>
>>>> On Dec 27, 2018, at 7:36 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID>
wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Harbs,
>>>>
>>>> I just changed QName.toString() to match the new namespace format the
compiler is outputting in order to make Google Closure Compiler happy. Now I'm
wondering if QName.toString() is used in Royale XML.
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>> -Alex
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
