Re: [codenameone-discussions] Re: iOS Wizard and two-factor authentication

2019-03-20 Thread ben . thacker 
I will pickup a newer ios device and turn on 2-factor. Thanks for your 
comments.

On Wednesday, March 20, 2019 at 5:47:12 AM UTC-6, Steve Hannah wrote:
>
> I personally use 2-factor auth, and it works with the certificate wizard.  
> 2-step auth should also work, but I don't currently have access to any 
> accounts that use that type of authentication, so I haven't tested it 
> myself.
>
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 8:33 PM Shai Almog  > wrote:
>
>> As far as I know we only support the two-factor authentication. 
>>
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "CodenameOne Discussions" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to codenameone-discussions+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
>> .
>> Visit this group at 
>> https://groups.google.com/group/codenameone-discussions.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/codenameone-discussions/7cc27667-d054-4e07-9709-b75fe95e8159%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> 
>> .
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Steve Hannah
> Software Developer
> Codename One
> http://www.codenameone.com
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"CodenameOne Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to codenameone-discussions+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/codenameone-discussions.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/codenameone-discussions/e8a40b49-c90d-46cd-8d95-7bfd5aef1b23%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [codenameone-discussions] Does compilation remove "empty" methods?

2019-03-20 Thread Gareth Murfin 
whoops i meant

if (1==2)
{
 _("hello");//this surely would be redundant code and removed?
 doSomeWork();//this surely would be redundant code and removed?
}

On Wednesday, March 20, 2019 at 10:24:01 PM UTC+8, Gareth Murfin wrote:
>
> Thanks for the answer. Oh shame, I thought proguard already did this a 
> decade ago? I mean if the compiler is even slightly smart and a variable is 
> declared *final*, then its not really runtime state I would have thought 
> and therefore should be removed.  Would it be the same if you did something 
> like:
>
> if (1==1)
> {
>  _("hello");//this surely would be redundant code and removed?
>  doSomeWork();//this surely would be redundant code and removed?
> }
>
> On Wednesday, March 20, 2019 at 7:50:41 PM UTC+8, Steve Hannah wrote:
>>
>> Build-time pruning does not make use of any runtime state for determining 
>> code paths.  Therefore changing the value of Prefs.DEBUG would have no 
>> effect.  
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 1:31 AM Gareth Murfin  
>> wrote:
>>
>>> So I always make a method like this:
>>>
>>> //for printing
>>> private static void _(String s)
>>> {
>>> if (Prefs.DEBUG)
>>> {
>>> com.codename1.io.Log.p(Prefs.ANSI_GREEN+"StateMachine 
>>> "+s);
>>> }
>>> }
>>>
>>> then when it comes to release I set Prefs.DEBUG (which is final) to 
>>> false, would this mean the method was stripped out during compilation? On 
>>> both iOS/Android? Or not ? It's just that during dev I really need A LOT of 
>>> print outs to follow my code, but then for release obviously I dont want 
>>> any. In the old J2ME days I used to do a find and replace on all calls to 
>>> _("hello"); etc before release, but im wondering if that's necessary 
>>> anymore? 
>>>
>>> I assume if its not stripped out during compilation then each call even 
>>> if it really does nothing may add up (i do a lot in loops etc) to 
>>> eventually slow certain things down (even by X many ms). But from what I 
>>> understand modern java compilers would remove it since it really doesnt do 
>>> anything if debug is false.
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>> Groups "CodenameOne Discussions" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>>> an email to codenameone-discussions+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>> Visit this group at 
>>> https://groups.google.com/group/codenameone-discussions.
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/codenameone-discussions/da3337af-e83e-4c7d-bdbf-487375537853%40googlegroups.com
>>>  
>>> 
>>> .
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Steve Hannah
>> Software Developer
>> Codename One
>> http://www.codenameone.com
>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"CodenameOne Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to codenameone-discussions+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/codenameone-discussions.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/codenameone-discussions/a529f339-8380-453a-9dce-c1e2a2ffdc61%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [codenameone-discussions] Does compilation remove "empty" methods?

2019-03-20 Thread Steve Hannah 
Build-time pruning does not make use of any runtime state for determining
code paths.  Therefore changing the value of Prefs.DEBUG would have no
effect.

On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 1:31 AM Gareth Murfin 
wrote:

> So I always make a method like this:
>
> //for printing
> private static void _(String s)
> {
> if (Prefs.DEBUG)
> {
> com.codename1.io.Log.p(Prefs.ANSI_GREEN+"StateMachine "+s);
> }
> }
>
> then when it comes to release I set Prefs.DEBUG (which is final) to false,
> would this mean the method was stripped out during compilation? On both
> iOS/Android? Or not ? It's just that during dev I really need A LOT of
> print outs to follow my code, but then for release obviously I dont want
> any. In the old J2ME days I used to do a find and replace on all calls to
> _("hello"); etc before release, but im wondering if that's necessary
> anymore?
>
> I assume if its not stripped out during compilation then each call even if
> it really does nothing may add up (i do a lot in loops etc) to eventually
> slow certain things down (even by X many ms). But from what I understand
> modern java compilers would remove it since it really doesnt do anything if
> debug is false.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "CodenameOne Discussions" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to codenameone-discussions+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at
> https://groups.google.com/group/codenameone-discussions.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/codenameone-discussions/da3337af-e83e-4c7d-bdbf-487375537853%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>


-- 
Steve Hannah
Software Developer
Codename One
http://www.codenameone.com

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"CodenameOne Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to codenameone-discussions+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/codenameone-discussions.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/codenameone-discussions/CAGOYrKWRVO_r%2Bc%3D3DiVXVBFcNJNnVED0JFSTJ40O9vOMg45utw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [codenameone-discussions] Re: iOS Wizard and two-factor authentication

2019-03-20 Thread Steve Hannah 
I personally use 2-factor auth, and it works with the certificate wizard.
2-step auth should also work, but I don't currently have access to any
accounts that use that type of authentication, so I haven't tested it
myself.

On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 8:33 PM Shai Almog  wrote:

> As far as I know we only support the two-factor authentication.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "CodenameOne Discussions" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to codenameone-discussions+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at
> https://groups.google.com/group/codenameone-discussions.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/codenameone-discussions/7cc27667-d054-4e07-9709-b75fe95e8159%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>


-- 
Steve Hannah
Software Developer
Codename One
http://www.codenameone.com

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"CodenameOne Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to codenameone-discussions+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/codenameone-discussions.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/codenameone-discussions/CAGOYrKVHLBqQbHCv6%3DEqsSLZ9BquL-aV9cgTsy_3tcgka-SBuA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[codenameone-discussions] Does compilation remove "empty" methods?

2019-03-20 Thread Gareth Murfin 
So I always make a method like this:

//for printing
private static void _(String s)
{
if (Prefs.DEBUG)
{
com.codename1.io.Log.p(Prefs.ANSI_GREEN+"StateMachine "+s);
}
}

then when it comes to release I set Prefs.DEBUG (which is final) to false, 
would this mean the method was stripped out during compilation? On both 
iOS/Android? Or not ? It's just that during dev I really need A LOT of 
print outs to follow my code, but then for release obviously I dont want 
any. In the old J2ME days I used to do a find and replace on all calls to 
_("hello"); etc before release, but im wondering if that's necessary 
anymore? 

I assume if its not stripped out during compilation then each call even if 
it really does nothing may add up (i do a lot in loops etc) to eventually 
slow certain things down (even by X many ms). But from what I understand 
modern java compilers would remove it since it really doesnt do anything if 
debug is false.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"CodenameOne Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to codenameone-discussions+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/codenameone-discussions.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/codenameone-discussions/da3337af-e83e-4c7d-bdbf-487375537853%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.