I have added a section that includes the four compiler options that Carlos
mentioned. If there are more that, when used, reduce output size, they
should go there. I have not populated the descriptions, as a smart person
should do that.

a

On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 3:23 PM Andrew Wetmore <[email protected]> wrote:

> Yes, that page is a good location. Should we start a subsection for these
> options which have the benefit of reducing output size?
>
> a
>
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 1:48 PM Carlos Rovira <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Josh,
>>
>> thanks for working on this. I finally could get here after weeks of hard
>> work in other things with almost not time.
>> I tried in Tour de Jewel with:
>>
>> -export-public-symbols=false
>> -prevent-rename-protected-symbols=false
>> -prevent-rename-internal-symbols=false
>> -prevent-rename-public-static-methods=false
>> -prevent-rename-public-instance-methods=false
>>
>> (for what I read that's the set it can be used without breaking app)
>>
>> and a downsize from 1045kb to 910kb so amazing! :)
>>
>> I'll try to add to TodoMVC as well and see what happens ;)
>>
>> @Andrew I think you and Josh can add this doc to the Royale Docs compiler
>> options page here [1]
>>
>> [1] https://apache.github.io/royale-docs/compiler/compiler-options
>>
>>
>>
>> El mar, 10 nov 2020 a las 23:36, Josh Tynjala (<[email protected]
>> >)
>> escribió:
>>
>> > Hi Andrew,
>> >
>> > Yes, I can help with that!
>> >
>> > --
>> > Josh Tynjala
>> > Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 3:22 PM Andrew Wetmore <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Josh, this is very interesting. I would like to include an actionable
>> > > amount of this information in our user documentation. If I create a
>> page
>> > in
>> > > the help docs for it, can you help me populate instructions based on
>> your
>> > > researchs?
>> > >
>> > > Thanks!
>> > >
>> > > Andrew
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 6:16 PM Josh Tynjala <
>> [email protected]>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Hi all,
>> > > >
>> > > > Some of you have probably been wondering about my changes to the
>> > compiler
>> > > > over the last year or more. I apologize again for occasionally
>> breaking
>> > > > things for short periods. It's been quite a challenge getting this
>> > stuff
>> > > > working, but I'm excited to finally be able to report some real
>> > > > improvements that pretty much anyone should be able to take
>> advantage
>> > of
>> > > > when building a Royale app.
>> > > >
>> > > > First some background. A while back, Harbs asked me to look into
>> ways
>> > of
>> > > > reducing the file size of release builds. As you may know, we use
>> > > Google's
>> > > > Closure compiler to optimize our generated JavaScript. Closure can
>> be
>> > > very
>> > > > aggressive in its optimizations, by renaming symbols (things like
>> > > variable
>> > > > and function names) and removing "dead code" that is detected as
>> never
>> > > > being called.
>> > > >
>> > > > Closure's optimizations are good, but they also require developers
>> to
>> > be
>> > > > very careful about how they write their JavaScript code. When you
>> > enable
>> > > > Closure's full optimizations, you are not allowed to use certain
>> > > JavaScript
>> > > > features because Closure cannot analyze them properly. For instance,
>> > > > consider the following code:
>> > > >
>> > > > var propName= "myProp";
>> > > > var value = obj[propName];
>> > > >
>> > > > When you dynamically access a property with a string, Closure cannot
>> > > > reliably know that the property exists and will be accessed at
>> runtime.
>> > > It
>> > > > may decide to rename or remove that property, which would break
>> things
>> > at
>> > > > runtime.
>> > > >
>> > > > ActionScript supports many of the same restricted dynamic features
>> too,
>> > > so
>> > > > if you want to support the entire AS3 language, we can't let
>> Closure do
>> > > its
>> > > > full optimization. Luckily, Closure also provides a bit of a
>> backdoor:
>> > it
>> > > > allows you to "export" symbols, which means that they won't be
>> renamed
>> > > and
>> > > > they won't be removed as dead code. Traditionally, we have made
>> heavy
>> > use
>> > > > of this exporting feature in Royale.
>> > > >
>> > > > Harbs wanted to know if we absolutely needed to export everything
>> that
>> > we
>> > > > currently export, and if we could potentially allow developers to
>> turn
>> > > off
>> > > > exporting entirely, as long as they follow the stricter rules
>> required
>> > by
>> > > > Closure.
>> > > >
>> > > > I won't go into all of the details, but over the last several
>> months,
>> > > I've
>> > > > been changing the compiler to give developers more control over
>> release
>> > > > builds. In particular, control over which symbols get exported, but
>> > also
>> > > > the ability to block Closure from renaming symbols that haven't been
>> > > > exported.
>> > > >
>> > > > Now, for some of the results. I'm going to share the output file
>> size
>> > of
>> > > > the release build for several Royale projects with various different
>> > > > compiler options.
>> > > >
>> > > > For the example projects included with Royale, I built royale-asjs
>> > commit
>> > > > 94f12ed0e564b0b443834400dc2fc06d61b90a8a from October 26, 2020. If
>> you
>> > > want
>> > > > to try building these examples yourself, the file sizes of release
>> > builds
>> > > > may be slightly different, if you use a different commit.
>> > > >
>> > > > SpectrumBrowser is a project developed by Harbs and his team. I used
>> > > commit
>> > > > d25a3def972b15ec029ae838f1a8a677d2d158bd from October 20 for the
>> > results
>> > > > below. Repo: https://github.com/unhurdle/spectrum-royale/
>> > > >
>> > > > To establish a baseline, I built all of these projects with the
>> older
>> > > > Royale 0.9.7 compiler first.
>> > > >
>> > > > ==========
>> > > > Baseline: royale-compiler 0.9.7
>> > > > ==========
>> > > >
>> > > > HelloWorld: 68 KB
>> > > > ASDoc: 231 KB
>> > > > TourDeJewel: 1074 KB
>> > > > SpectrumBrowser: 900 KB
>> > > >
>> > > > Again, I am building the same AS3/MXML code every time, but these
>> first
>> > > > numbers are from building with the older compiler. All apps build
>> and
>> > run
>> > > > successfully.
>> > > >
>> > > > -----
>> > > >
>> > > > The rest of the results are built with royale-compiler commit
>> > > > df8bd9f686f1bbf89539e545377b2797c646172c from November 3.
>> > > >
>> > > > All results below include the difference in KB and %. These values
>> are
>> > > > always in comparison to the baseline numbers above.
>> > > >
>> > > > ==========
>> > > > Result 1: 0.9.8 default options
>> > > > ==========
>> > > >
>> > > > HelloWorld: 84 KB (+10 KB / +24%)
>> > > > ASDoc: 254 KB (+23 KB / +10%)
>> > > > TourDeJewel: 1105 KB (+31 KB / +3%)
>> > > > SpectrumBrowser: 936 KB (+36 KB / +4%)
>> > > >
>> > > > These examples are slightly larger when built with the newer
>> compiler.
>> > > > That's expected. It's not ideal, but in the process of testing a
>> > > multitude
>> > > > of things to be sure that nothing had broken after my compiler
>> > changes, I
>> > > > discovered some cases where exporting a symbol didn't actually work
>> > > > correctly in 0.9.7! To properly fix the bug and export these
>> symbols,
>> > > there
>> > > > was no choice but to make the file size a bit larger.
>> > > >
>> > > > ==========
>> > > > Result 2: Disable export
>> > > > ==========
>> > > >
>> > > > HelloWorld: 74 KB (+6 KB / +9%)
>> > > > ASDoc: 227 KB (-4 KB / -2%)
>> > > > TourDeJewel: 942 KB (-132 KB / -12%)
>> > > > SpectrumBrowser: 882 KB (-18 KB / -2%)
>> > > >
>> > > > In this round, I added the *-export-public-symbols=false* compiler
>> > > option.
>> > > > You may recall that I said earlier that I also modified the
>> compiler to
>> > > > allow a symbol not to be exported, but still prevent it from being
>> > > renamed.
>> > > > With that in mind, -export-public-symbols=false basically tells the
>> > > > compiler that it still can't rename things, but it is allowed to
>> remove
>> > > > what it perceives as dead code.
>> > > >
>> > > > HelloWorld is still slightly larger than 0.9.7, but the three other
>> > > > examples are now slightly smaller than 0.9.7.
>> > > >
>> > > > Most developers should be able to safely add
>> > -export-public-symbols=false
>> > > > to their compiler options when building a Royale app. The only time
>> > that
>> > > > you might still want this exporting is if you have external
>> JavaScript
>> > in
>> > > > your page that isn't part of your Royale app, but it needs to call
>> > > > functions/classes in your Royale app.
>> > > >
>> > > > ==========
>> > > > Result 3: Allow non-public things to be renamed
>> > > > ==========
>> > > >
>> > > > HelloWorld: 72 KB (+4 KB / +6%)
>> > > > ASDoc: 221 KB (-10 KB / -4%)
>> > > > TourDeJewel: 918 KB (-156 KB / -15%)
>> > > > SpectrumBrowser: 861 KB (-39 KB / -4%)
>> > > >
>> > > > In this round, I used the following compiler options:
>> > > >
>> > > > -export-public-symbols=false
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> *-prevent-rename-protected-symbols=false-prevent-rename-internal-symbols=false*
>> > > >
>> > > > The two new options allow Closure compiler to rename protected and
>> > > internal
>> > > > symbols. Once again, HelloWorld is still slightly larger than 0.9.7,
>> > but
>> > > > the other three examples have gotten smaller again.
>> > > >
>> > > > While -prevent-rename-public-symbols=false exists too, we cannot use
>> > it.
>> > > > The examples would not work correctly at runtime. This option would
>> > > > probably work in a pure AS3 app, but our implementation of MXML in
>> > Royale
>> > > > uses dynamic language features that Closure restricts. Unless that
>> is
>> > > > fixed, we need to avoid renaming certain public symbols.
>> > > >
>> > > > Again, most developers should be able to add
>> > > > -prevent-rename-protected-symbols=false
>> > > > and -prevent-rename-internal-symbols=false to their Royale app's
>> > compiler
>> > > > options. You might need to prevent renaming of protected/internal
>> > symbols
>> > > > if you access them dynamically. However, in my experience, people
>> are
>> > > much
>> > > > more likely to access public symbols dynamically.
>> > > >
>> > > > -----
>> > > >
>> > > > ==========
>> > > > Result 4: Allow public methods to be renamed
>> > > > ==========
>> > > >
>> > > > HelloWorld: 64 KB (-4 KB / -6%)
>> > > > ASDoc: 206 KB (-25 KB / -11%)
>> > > > TourDeJewel: 881 KB (-193 KB / -18%)
>> > > > SpectrumBrowser: 828 KB (-72 KB / -8%)
>> > > >
>> > > > In this round, I used the following compiler options:
>> > > >
>> > > > -export-public-symbols=false
>> > > > -prevent-rename-protected-symbols=false
>> > > > -prevent-rename-internal-symbols=false
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> *-prevent-rename-public-static-methods=false-prevent-rename-public-instance-methods=false
>> > > > *
>> > > >
>> > > > The two new options allow Closure to rename methods that are public.
>> > Now,
>> > > > all four examples are smaller than 0.9.7, and the file size
>> difference
>> > is
>> > > > getting even more dramatic.
>> > > >
>> > > > Once again, -prevent-rename-public-static-methods=false and
>> > > > -prevent-rename-public-instance-methods=false should be safe for
>> most
>> > > > developers to enable when compiling their Royale app. In my
>> experience,
>> > > > calling methods dynamically is rare.
>> > > >
>> > > > ==========
>> > > > More new compiler options
>> > > > ==========
>> > > >
>> > > > There are some additional new compiler options available, but using
>> > them
>> > > is
>> > > > likely to break most Royale apps.
>> > > >
>> > > > -prevent-rename-public-static-variables=false
>> > > > -prevent-rename-public-instance-variables=false
>> > > > -prevent-rename-public-static-accessors=false
>> > > > -prevent-rename-public-instance-accessors=false
>> > > >
>> > > > These options control whether Closure allows variables or accessors
>> > > > (getters and setters) to be renamed. There are also similarly-named
>> > > options
>> > > > for protected and internal symbols, if you want more control over
>> those
>> > > > too, instead of using -prevent-rename-protected-symbols=false and
>> > > > -prevent-rename-internal-symbols=false.
>> > > >
>> > > > Unfortunately, renaming public variables/accessors is usually not
>> > > possible
>> > > > without breaking the app at runtime. In some apps, you might be
>> able to
>> > > > allow public static members to be renamed. However, in my
>> experience,
>> > > > binding to static constants is pretty common, and renaming breaks
>> those
>> > > > bindings.
>> > > >
>> > > > ==========
>> > > > Next Steps
>> > > > ==========
>> > > >
>> > > > Ideally, I'd like to make it possible for developers to be able to
>> tell
>> > > > Closure that it's allowed to rename all symbols, including public
>> > ones. I
>> > > > believe that we could see even more file size savings in release
>> builds
>> > > if
>> > > > Closure works with full optimizations for all symbols. Obviously,
>> > > > ActionScript developers would be required to strictly follow
>> Closure's
>> > > > rules, if they opt into renaming of public symbols, but that's a
>> choice
>> > > > that they should be allowed to make.
>> > > >
>> > > > As I mentioned above, our implementation of MXML and binding uses
>> > dynamic
>> > > > access, which is not compatible with Closure's full optimizations.
>> To
>> > > > support those optimizations, I will need to explore changes to how
>> we
>> > > > generate JS for MXML, and how it gets parsed at runtime.
>> > > >
>> > > > We previously discussed this subject a bit in this older thread from
>> > > > January 2020:
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r843e55252e37967b71b1430a2a904719791d698f3e5e2a79de74e493%40%3Cdev.royale.apache.org%3E
>> > > >
>> > > > At the time, I tried out some ideas that we came up with while
>> > > > brainstorming, but all had various downsides that didn't make for an
>> > > > obvious winner. In the end, I decided to set further investigation
>> > aside
>> > > > and first focus on exporting/renaming stuff. Now, I'm ready to take
>> a
>> > > > second look with a fresh perspective, and maybe we'll have some new
>> > ideas
>> > > > to try.
>> > > >
>> > > > -----
>> > > >
>> > > > That was really long, so thank you for reading, if you made it to
>> the
>> > > end!
>> > > >
>> > > > TL;DR: By enabling certain, new compiler options, most Royale
>> > developers
>> > > > can make their app release builds smaller. Additionally, I plan to
>> keep
>> > > > investigating, and I expect to find more ways to reduce file size in
>> > the
>> > > > future.
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > Josh Tynjala
>> > > > Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Andrew Wetmore
>> > >
>> > > http://cottage14.blogspot.com/
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Carlos Rovira
>> Apache Member & Apache Royale PMC
>> *Apache Software Foundation*
>> http://about.me/carlosrovira
>>
>
>
> --
> Andrew Wetmore
>
> http://cottage14.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
Andrew Wetmore

http://cottage14.blogspot.com/

Reply via email to