Hi Josh, I think this piece of knowledge you just exposed here is key for the success of Royale.
I'll try to use this in TDJ to experiment with it and will use in the blog example I plan to do. thanks! El jue., 2 may. 2019 a las 16:36, Josh Tynjala (<joshtynj...@apache.org>) escribió: > > Users can't do this, they required that Royale framework devs add > typedefs to the typedefs repo and wait to next SDK release. What does not > seems very useful. > > Users can create their own typedefs from scratch. > > I just created a quick example for hljs, that exposes the highlightBlock() > function: > > https://paste.apache.org/dIq0 > > Basically, the class needs an asdoc comment with the @externs tag (this is > something that comes from Google Closure compiler, which we use to create > release builds) and the compiler should handle the rest. > > As I understand it, you don't even need to create a SWC library for custom > typedefs. Recently, Alex mentioned that the mxmlc compiler is smart enough > to handle a source file as long as it has the @externs tag. > > - Josh > > On 2019/05/02 09:34:37, Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > to sumarize (let me know if I'm wrong), the current ways to integrate an > > existing library are 3: > > > > 1.- access vía brackets notation: This is the most easy and direct, an > > example is TourDeJewel in class utils.HighlightCode > > > > var hljs:Object = window["hljs"]; > > hljs["highlightBlock"](block); > > > > but this one is not what we really want since we are going with Roayle > and > > AS3 to get type checking and strong typing. So this, although useful is > not > > what we really want to use in out Apps, but since we want to maintain the > > dynamic aspect of the language it could be very useful sometimes > > > > 2.- using typedefs > > > > This will be the next step to use a real type and dot notation, but seems > > not easy or direct. > > Users can't do this, they required that Royale framework devs add > typedefs > > to the typedefs repo and wait to next SDK release. What does not seems > very > > useful. > > > > In the other hand we'll need to know how to extend current typedefs since > > don't know if we have docs about this. Until now I added to "missing.js" > > file fo now, but this doesn't seems a valid path since it lacks > > organization, separation, and a way for all people contributing to know > wha > > we have, what can be added and where, if not we'll find in time lots of > > code very difficult to maintain. > > > > Yishay and Josh talked about to use TypeScript, but seems that is already > > explored by Josh but not a valid path since will be very difficult to > > maintain. > > > > 3.- wrapping libraries > > > > This is how we did with MDL. This will be recommended when we want to > > integrate existing libraries with Royale to make it work with our APIs > in a > > more seamless way. But the problems is that this is very laborious. Can > be > > useful for some concrete libraries and we should do when needed (the case > > is MDL). But the problem is that this not solve the problem of our users > > that need to integrate a existing library themselves in a quick way. > > > > Let me know if you know other way. > > > > For me method 1, is ok to do the work, but doesn't make us justice. > > method 2 should be the main one if there's a fast and easy way... I'm > > missing something here? Can users create typedefs themselves? > > method 3 can be useful for us or for users (doing their own libs, and > > eventually can share with us to add to official royale repo and sdk) > > but is something not fast at all and not as convenient and direct as > method > > 2, and will require maintenance as libs change. > > > > Could we agree that this is the currently available ways in Royale now to > > use external JS libs? > > > > thanks > > > > -- > > Carlos Rovira > > http://about.me/carlosrovira > > > -- Carlos Rovira http://about.me/carlosrovira
