Harbs created FLEX-35075:
----------------------------
Summary: E4X filters need to be smarter
Key: FLEX-35075
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-35075
Project: Apache Flex
Issue Type: Bug
Components: FalconJX
Affects Versions: Apache FalconJX 0.6.0
Reporter: Harbs
The following expression:
{code:actionscript}
xmlSource.Set1.child.(year == "2015");
{code}
compiles into:
{code:javascript}
xmlSource.child('Set1').child('child').filter(function(node){return (node.year
== "2015")});
{code}
This is all fine except for the filter expression.
node.year means nothing in Javascript.
I'm not sure the best way to compile this. The following will work, but it will
probably get tricky covering all cases:
{code:javascript}
xmlSource.child('Set1').child('child').filter(function(node){return
(node.child("year").toString() == "2015")});
{code}
What might make more sense might be to add some helper functions like:
XML.isEqual(randomObject); (mapped to ==)
XML.isNotEqual(randomObject); (mapped to !=)
XML.greaterThan(randomObject); (mapped to >)
XML.lessThan(randomObject); (mapped to <)
XML.greaterThanOrEqualTo(randomObject);(mapped to >=)
XML.lessThanOrEqualTo(randomObject);(mapped to <=)
And the code will figure out the best way to handle these comparisons based on
the type at runtime.
In that case, this would compile like this:
xmlSource.child('Set1').child('child').filter(function(node){return
(node.child("year").isEqualTo("2015"))});
Thoughts?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
