I have no special preference regarding syntax as long as it’s simple to use and easy to parse.
From: Josh Tynjala<mailto:joshtynj...@bowlerhat.dev> Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2020 7:20 PM To: Apache Royale Development<mailto:dev@royale.apache.org> Subject: Re: Script Loading Order (Continuing Heads-Up thread from Users) I'm not a fan of this syntax. It's a weird mix between HTML/XML and... some kind of flat configuration file? I'd rather use a separate <inject_script> for each JS file and a separate <inject_styles> for each CSS file. Or maybe something like this: @inject_script path/to/script.js @inject_styles path/to/styles.css -- Josh Tynjala Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev> On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 12:22 AM Yishay Weiss <yishayj...@hotmail.com> wrote: > I propose to change the syntax to > > <inject_sources> > js=http://js1.js > js=http://js2.js > css=http://css1.js > <inject_sources> > > If it’s in the main app the compiler will parse this and inject html, same > way it did before. Injected html is ensured to load serially, so it should > load before App.js. > > If it’s in a module the compiler will parse this and inject a script to > the __deps file we create for modules, similar to what’s being done now. It > may be that we’ll need to add to the script some mechanism to ensure serial > loading, similar to what gcl does. > > I can explore this when I have more time, probably next week, or someone > else is welcome to fix this differently. > > Thanks. > > > > From: Alex Harui<mailto:aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> > Sent: Monday, May 18, 2020 7:53 PM > To: dev@royale.apache.org<mailto:dev@royale.apache.org> > Subject: Re: Script Loading Order (Continuing Heads-Up thread from Users) > > Ah, ok. I thought that closure was injecting the main app's script block > so the dynamic script would be in front of it but it makes sense that > wouldn't happen at release time. > > IIRC, we control the launch of the app. I thought there is one more > script somewhere that calls app.start() that is generated by the compiler. > IMO, that script can be altered to wait for scripts to load. > > HTH, > -Alex > > > On 5/18/20, 8:44 AM, "Yishay Weiss" <yishayj...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > Unless I missed something that’s what it’s doing right now after my > fix. I’ll try to explain the scenario as I see it (no modules). > > Suppose we have an app that compiles to the following html. > > <html> > <head> > <script type="text/javascript"> > var script = > document.createElement("script"); > > script.setAttribute("src", "hljs.min.js"); > > document.head.appendChild(script); > </script> > <script type=”text/JavaScript” > src=”App.js”></script> > </head> > <body></body> > </html> > > After the first script element is loaded, the dom will look like: > > <html> > <head> > <script type="text/javascript"> > var script = > document.createElement("script"); > > script.setAttribute("src", "hljs.min.js"); > > document.head.appendChild(script); > </script> > <script type=”text/JavaScript” > src=”hljs.min.js”></script> > <script type=”text/JavaScript” > src=”App.js”></script> > </head> > <body></body> > </html> > > However, App.js will still be loaded before hljs.min.js because it was > not created dynamically. App.js will fail because it depends on hljs. > > From: Alex Harui<mailto:aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> > Sent: Monday, May 18, 2020 6:21 PM > To: dev@royale.apache.org<mailto:dev@royale.apache.org> > Subject: Re: Script Loading Order (Continuing Heads-Up thread from > Users) > > I don't think we have to inject these scripts into the main .js file. > The compiler knows when it is compiling the main app or a module. When > compiling the main app, it should inject the script in the HEAD of the html > wrapper. For modules, it can inject the script into a separate file. The > ModuleLoader already loads extra files before loading the module. It can > load one more file. > > Of course, I could be wrong... > -Alex > > On 5/18/20, 7:38 AM, "Yishay Weiss" <yishayj...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > From what I’ve read [1] scripts injected dynamically will always > load after static script elements. So I don’t think there’s a good way to > ensure the proper order in run-time unless we do something like > 99a8c8356573ff16b668f2d39a447355c673fee3 , but that’s verbose and working > with libs should be simple. > > Any ideas? > > [1] > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.html5rocks.com%2Fen%2Ftutorials%2Fspeed%2Fscript-loading%2F%23disqus_thread&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C11eca28410ab4d377cb408d7fb4254da%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637254134629069170&sdata=NuGReT8L9tH9K1VQNxgN%2BctVG3WDACYxMsaSywrTOSc%3D&reserved=0 > > From: Alex Harui<mailto:aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> > Sent: Monday, May 18, 2020 8:03 AM > To: dev@royale.apache.org<mailto:dev@royale.apache.org> > > > Subject: Re: Script Loading Order (Continuing Heads-Up thread from > Users) > > Every time I look, closure seems to change how it works. It looks > like they are using callbacks and UIDs. I assume they can't use await or > Promise because of IE support. I haven't looked at the code you generate, > but might have to do something similar, IOW, wait for the callback or known > value before continuing. > > I think that if we create the script during the running of another > script that we have to find a way to wait for that created script. > > It might help to know what kind of initialization code needed the > definition so early. One alternative is that such code needs to be > responsible for waiting. > > Most of our Application classes have a wait mechanism. We could > leverage that, but that's also pretty late. > > It could be that for Applications we generate the script in the > head, and for modules we generate a separate script that is preloaded. > > HTH, > -Alex > > On 5/17/20, 9:03 AM, "Yishay Weiss" <yishayj...@hotmail.com> > wrote: > > > >Is the script tag from inject_script going before or after > the script tag for the application (should be before, >IMO)? > > It’s going before but the network shows it’s loaded after. > > >Make sure the script tag has the same settings as the script > tags google closure uses in js-debug. I think they set some options so the > scripts load in order. > > I see type being specified in the gcl script elements, while > inject ones don’t. I suppose it’s worth seeing if that makes a difference, > though I couldn’t find evidence for that on the web. > > > > > > >
