date:20190503

FWIW, the AVM (ActionScript Virtual Machine) has sealed classes (not modifiable 
at runtime) on purpose:  to secure your code from hacking.  Polyfills are 
dangerous.  A good one helps, but the mere fact they work means that others can 
inject capabilities into your classes at runtime.

Also, consider that we want to leave the door open to target other 
runtimes/platforms.  Many will not support polyfills and other runtime class 
modifications (eval).

So, while it is fine to access a polyfill via bracket syntax.  And I would do 
so if I was in a hurry, IMO, for a more future-proof support, you should 
consider what the polyfill does and what is its closest language construct.  
Polyfills sort of mimic Aspects and/or multiple inheritance.  But there is no 
guarantee those things are supported in all runtimes/platforms.

Another thing similar to polyfills are actually beads, if you can get yourself 
away from trying to access features on concrete instances (UIBase or whatever). 
 As I mentioned upthread, use of interfaces and "has" provides more flexibility 
and, while I've never actually tried it, might work for polyfills as well.  So, 
instead of assuming that a polyfill adds a property/method to an instance (yes, 
I know that is actually what it does), its Royale API surface can be a bead or 
interface.  That is more code for sure, but that pattern future-proofs the 
Royale code.

IOW, we shouldn't really encourage people to write 
indicator_content["animate"].  Yes, I know they can.  But we probably should 
encourage them to access a bead.  So then you would write:

var animateBead:IAnimateBead = indicator_content.getBeadByType(IAnimateBead);
animateBead.animate();

The AnimateBead's JavaScript implementation would call strand["animate"]().

But then it makes it possible to mimic adding some animation engine at runtime 
on other runtimes/platforms since beads should be implementable on every 
runtime/platform we are interested in.

My 2 cents,
-Alex

On 5/3/19, 3:39 PM, "Josh Tynjala"  wrote:

ActionScript does not provide a mechanism for taking an existing class and 
adding new methods or properties to it.

In this case, I don't think you have any other option than to use bracket 
syntax, like indicator_content["animate"].

- Josh

On 2019/05/03 21:08:56, Carlos Rovira  wrote: 
> Another more question I just found and don't know how to solve.
> 
> if I have a polyfill like Web Animations API that adds "animate" method to
> any Element object.
> Can someone post an example of an @extern file for a case like this? I
> don't imagine right now how can this be done, and maybe right not it can't
> be done.
> 
> Example code I'm using now with brackets notation is:
> 
> indicator_content["animate"]({  pass to animate method> });
> 
> so I want royale user can do instead:
> 
> indicator_content.animate({...});
> 
> thanks
> 
> El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 23:03, Carlos Rovira 
()
> escribió:
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> > I now Greg is busy now with an important update
> > I can try to do it myself if Alex point me to the code I should look, 
for
> > me it would be part of the task to make this blog example in the best 
way
> > possible.
> > thanks
> >
> > El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 22:58, Greg Dove ()
> > escribió:
> >
> >> 'I'm pretty sure externs are not scanned for inject_html.  Volunteers 
are
> >> welcome to teach the compiler to do so.'
> >> I am happy to look into this sometime in the next few days. Just 
trying to
> >> finish up something else first...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, May 4, 2019 at 8:54 AM Alex Harui 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi Carlos,
> >> >
> >> > I'm pretty sure externs are not scanned for inject_html.  Volunteers 
are
> >> > welcome to teach the compiler to do so.
> >> >
> >> > -Alex
> >> >
> >> > On 5/3/19, 1:50 PM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > while putting the pieces together for the blog example I'm 
finding
> >> the
> >> > following.
> >> >
> >> > For classes that wraps a js code that is an intrinsic file 
needed to
> >> > make
> >> > the code function I think inject_html should work but I'm trying 
it
> >> and
> >> > seems this is not working. The code is like this:
> >> >
> >> > package
> >> > {
> >> > /**
> >> >  * @externs
> >> >  */
> >> > public class hljs
> >> > {
> >> > /**
> >> >  * 
> >> >  * https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdnjs.cloudflare.com%2Fajax%2Flibs%2Fhighlight.js%2F9.12.0%2Fhighlight.min.js&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C2ffc116355b14bd2667708d6d0183019%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de

Re: The start of a FullCalendar Royale component...

2019-05-03 Thread Frost, Andrew

Hi

Responding (belatedly!) to a few of these points:

- I need to look at how to get those typedefs working! as yes, it would be 
great to not have to use the obj["property"] notation!
- Equally: yes I found it useful to redefine the API. I don't like the way that 
everything is specified as a property within a config object that's passed in 
to the constructor, though it seems a common pattern in JavaScript. For me, I 
would to set up individual properties, so hopefully that's what this approach 
can achieve (and of course, now each property is set within the mxml tag)
- I just grabbed the latest source for that component, turns out to be 4.1.0.. 
I didn't get on so well with trying to actually find the API for the calendar 
in order to reproduce everything it can do, so was mostly working of the 
samples and demo code, trying to make sure the same thing could be done in 
Royale.

One interesting part I found was setting the header: rather than defining a 
class with a 'center' property (as I didn't know what other properties it might 
have) I just left this as an Object, and then in MXML I could use  to define it. Which struck me as incredibly flexible! - 
although not ideal I think, as then you lose all the benefits of the type 
checking and it wouldn't have corrected me if I spelt "center" and "centre", 
etc...

The injection of the script/css tags was interesting, I didn't want to have to 
pull in everything all at once, hence separating out the 'plugins' into 
different classes actually really helped with that. Probably it would be useful 
to have some interfaces defined so that we can identify which plugins are also 
views, and get the view-specific settings for these 'properly' rather than 
testing for the existence of a particular property..

Anyway: lots could be improved here, but it was a useful exercise..

thanks

   Andrew

-Original Message-
From: Dany Dhondt [mailto:archeme...@mac.com.INVALID] 
Sent: 03 May 2019 07:28
To: dev@royale.apache.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: The start of a FullCalendar Royale component...

The (very) good news is that is IS possible. To me as a developer (and others 
we’re hoping to use Royale), it is vital to know that it can be done. At some 
point in developing an application with Royale, we’ll stumble on some 
functionality or component which just isn’t available in Royale. At that point, 
it is simply not acceptable to say ‘well hey, it can’t be done right now but 
come back in a year or so’. 
FullCalendar is a good example because every developer will need a calendar 
component sooner or later. FC is becoming a standard in javascript (+70k 
downloads a week).
@Andrew, I’ll post the FullCalendar question on StackOverflow. Could you answer 
it? That way, Royale will emerge too when people search on the FullCalendar tag.
Another question: did you use the 4.x version of FC or the (older) 3.x version?

Thanks
Dany

> Op 3 mei 2019, om 07:55 heeft Piotr Zarzycki  het 
> volgende geschreven:
> 
> Hi Andrew,
> 
> First of all Thank you for using Moonshine! I think there is one good 
> advantage to going by your approach instead typedefs. You can redefine 
> API to completely new if you don't like in the original component. 
> Those new API may have a bit more of a AS3 style etc.
> 
> Thanks,
> Piotr
> 
> On Fri, May 3, 2019, 6:26 AM Alex Harui  wrote:
> 
>> Hi Andrew,
>> 
>> That's cool!  Thank you for demonstrating that such a thing can be done.
>> 
>> I'm not sure there is a "best approach" for doing something like 
>> this.  It really depends on how much time you want to put into it.  
>> If you want to use a 3rd-party component in your app and only want to 
>> use a few APIs, then the approach you took is fine and solves your problem 
>> quickly.
>> 
>> On the other hand, if you want to make it complete and offer it to 
>> others to use you may find that creating typedefs for the options and 
>> calendar objects and other objects you are wrapping will eliminate 
>> the need to use bracket access such as  'options["defaultView"] = 
>> _defaultView;' and thus allow the IDE to offer better code-assist and 
>> catch typos so you don't later waste time debugging why 
>> 'options["defaultview"]' is not working.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> -Alex
>> 
>> On 5/2/19, 2:07 PM, "Frost, Andrew"  wrote:
>> 
>>Hi
>> 
>>Something that Dany Dhondt wrote recently, about using the 
>> "fullcalendar" React component, got me to wondering how easy it was 
>> to wrap these sorts of third party components into Royale.
>> 
>>The answer turned out to be: it's pretty straightforward. I'm not 
>> sure I've used the best approach (no 'typedefs' or anything) but I've 
>> created some wrapper classes that can be used from MXML to drop in a 
>> calendar component and add events etc. Lots of extra work to do to 
>> get it to the stage where it's as functional as the JS/React etc 
>> versions, but the lack here is (a) time and (b) documentation (I 
>> can't see a full API for the var

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-typedefs #1281

See 


--
Started by timer
[EnvInject] - Loading node environment variables.
Building on master in workspace 

 > git.exe rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree # timeout=10
Fetching changes from the remote Git repository
 > git.exe config remote.origin.url 
 > https://github.com/apache/royale-typedefs.git # timeout=10
Fetching upstream changes from https://github.com/apache/royale-typedefs.git
 > git.exe --version # timeout=10
 > git.exe fetch --tags --progress 
 > https://github.com/apache/royale-typedefs.git 
 > +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
 > git.exe rev-parse "refs/remotes/origin/develop^{commit}" # timeout=10
 > git.exe rev-parse "refs/remotes/origin/origin/develop^{commit}" # timeout=10
Checking out Revision dbd99e87f4287329fc63088199f758ae2e9f2197 
(refs/remotes/origin/develop)
 > git.exe config core.sparsecheckout # timeout=10
 > git.exe checkout -f dbd99e87f4287329fc63088199f758ae2e9f2197
Commit message: "remove dialogPolyfill from missing.js since is not used"
 > git.exe rev-list --no-walk dbd99e87f4287329fc63088199f758ae2e9f2197 # 
 > timeout=10
[royale-typedefs] $ cmd.exe /C "C:\apache\apache-ant-1.9.9\bin\ant.bat main && 
exit %%ERRORLEVEL%%"
Buildfile: 


main:

download:
 [echo] 

[unjar] Expanding: C:\Program Files 
(x86)\Jenkins\workspace\royale-compiler\compiler-jx\lib\google\closure-compiler\compiler.jar
 into 

[unzip] Expanding: 

 into 

  [get] Getting: 
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/royale-extras/closure-compiler/royale/contrib/externs/svg.js
  [get] To: 

  [get] Getting: 
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/royale-extras/closure-compiler/royale/externs/es3.js
  [get] To: 

  [get] Getting: 
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/royale-extras/closure-compiler/royale/externs/es6.js
  [get] To: 

  [get] Getting: 
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/royale-extras/closure-compiler/royale/externs/browser/w3c_composition_event.js
  [get] To: 

  [get] Getting: 
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/royale-extras/closure-compiler/royale/externs/browser/w3c_css.js
  [get] To: 

  [get] Getting: 
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/royale-extras/closure-compiler/royale/externs/browser/gecko_dom.js
  [get] To: 

  [get] Getting: 
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/royale-extras/closure-compiler/royale/externs/browser/w3c_dom2.js
  [get] To: 

  [get] Getting: 
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/royale-extras/closure-compiler/royale/externs/browser/html5.js
  [get] To: 


double-check-file:
 [echo] ${env.ROYALE_DOWNLOAD_CACHE}
 [echo] Need file: ${still_no_file}

get-from-cache-if-needed:

double-check-file:
 [echo] ${env.ROYALE_DOWNLOAD_CACHE}
 [echo] Need file: ${still_no_file}

get-from-cache-if-needed:

double-check-file:
 [echo] ${env.ROYALE_DOWNLOAD_CACHE}
 [echo] Need file: ${still_no_file}

get-from-cache-if-needed:

double-check-file:
 [echo] ${env.ROYALE_DOWNLOAD_CACHE}
 [echo] Need file: ${still_no_file}

get-from-cache-if-needed:

double-check-file:
 [echo] ${env.ROYALE_DOWNLOAD_CACHE}
 [echo] Need file: ${still_no_file}

get-from-cache-if-needed:

double-check-file:
 [echo] ${env.ROYALE_DOWNLOAD_CACHE}
 [echo] Need file: ${still_no_file}

get-from-cache-if-needed:

double-check-file:
 [echo] ${env.ROYALE_DOWNLOAD_CACHE}
 [echo] Need file: ${still_no_file}

get-from-cache-if-ne

Re: Using @extrens ( RE: Example of access external JS using Apache Royale)

I just searched the compiler code.  Current inject_html handling appears to be 
in GoogDepsWriter.java.

On 5/3/19, 2:04 PM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:

Hi,

I now Greg is busy now with an important update
I can try to do it myself if Alex point me to the code I should look, for
me it would be part of the task to make this blog example in the best way
possible.
thanks

El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 22:58, Greg Dove ()
escribió:

> 'I'm pretty sure externs are not scanned for inject_html.  Volunteers are
> welcome to teach the compiler to do so.'
> I am happy to look into this sometime in the next few days. Just trying to
> finish up something else first...
>
>
>
> On Sat, May 4, 2019 at 8:54 AM Alex Harui 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Carlos,
> >
> > I'm pretty sure externs are not scanned for inject_html.  Volunteers are
> > welcome to teach the compiler to do so.
> >
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 5/3/19, 1:50 PM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > while putting the pieces together for the blog example I'm finding
> the
> > following.
> >
> > For classes that wraps a js code that is an intrinsic file needed to
> > make
> > the code function I think inject_html should work but I'm trying it
> and
> > seems this is not working. The code is like this:
> >
> > package
> > {
> > /**
> >  * @externs
> >  */
> > public class hljs
> > {
> > /**
> >  * 
> >  * https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdnjs.cloudflare.com%2Fajax%2Flibs%2Fhighlight.js%2F9.12.0%2Fhighlight.min.js&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C922752ecb7bf4513718208d6d00ae5fb%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636925142602102439&sdata=ubvldliTsViH69h%2FGeKby02C8H%2BKJ7HtblUo7dCnbrk%3D&reserved=0
> > ">
> > * https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdnjs.cloudflare.com%2Fajax%2Flibs%2Fhighlight.js%2F9.12.0%2Fstyles%2Fatom-one-dark.min.css&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C922752ecb7bf4513718208d6d00ae5fb%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636925142602102439&sdata=uBI0vW721xJqBH2I%2FuUrq92KIu2Vgf6YzcrOXEFGLHM%3D&reserved=0
> > ">
> >  * 
> >  */
> > public function hljs()
> > {
> > }
> >
> > public static function highlightBlock(block:Element):void {}
> > }
> > }
> >
> > So instead of add the inject_html in the code that calls the methods
> in
> > this step, I think it should  be here
> >
> > Make this sense?
> >
> >
> >
> > El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 9:38, Carlos Rovira (<
> > carlosrov...@apache.org>)
> > escribió:
> >
> > > Hi Alex,
> > >
> > > for me is difficult right now think about what would be better for
> > > TypeScript. I think all will depend on how people interact in the
> > following
> > > months/years to show us what't the best for Royale in the long
> term.
> > > I think bringing TS to Royale as a first citizen language will 
make
> > us
> > > more accesible and people will considere us more since TS is the
> > language
> > > people choose over AS3 (although I for example like AS3 more and 
if
> > we get
> > > few things like generics we'll be great to compete with TS), but
> > this is a
> > > very complex task, so I know this hardly be done unless someone
> > comes with
> > > time and knowledge to make it happen. And if we think about things
> > that are
> > > complex and hard to add and see the importance/value it will bring
> to
> > > Royale I think a WebAssembly target will be over TS since it
> clearly
> > > enhance the Roayle purpose of generate multiple sources.
> > >
> > > In the other hand, make TS just to do TypeDefs, again maybe users
> > should
> > > express here if it could be needed, I can't say right now how much
> > this
> > > could be important for Royale, so maybe time and users will let us
> > know
> > > what to do.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > El jue., 2 may. 2019 a las 22:44, Alex Harui
> > ()
> > > escribió:
> > >
> > >> The word "package" has many meanings.  In AS3 it is a way of
> > avoiding API
> > >> name collisions.  AIUI, an AS3 package in SWF code has no object
> or
> > >> function representation.  It effectively just creates a longer
> > "qualified
> > >> name".  IOW, in a SWF, if there is a class "mx.core.UIComponent",

Re: Using @extrens ( RE: Example of access external JS using Apache Royale)

2019-05-03 Thread Kenny Lerma

This is something I also ran into while converting my projects.
I would be great if we had a class tag to allow generic properties and
methods as is the case with MovieClip in flash.
Currently, you can get around this by setting the -strict flag to false,
but you lose a lot of error checking from the compiler.

I'm hoping we can add something like this in the future since a lot of
flash projects often make use of the generic properties and I would like to
add this to MovieClip in SpriteFlexjs.

FYI  Object(indicator_content).animate also works.

Kenny



On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 5:39 PM Josh Tynjala  wrote:

> ActionScript does not provide a mechanism for taking an existing class and
> adding new methods or properties to it.
>
> In this case, I don't think you have any other option than to use bracket
> syntax, like indicator_content["animate"].
>
> - Josh
>
> On 2019/05/03 21:08:56, Carlos Rovira  wrote:
> > Another more question I just found and don't know how to solve.
> >
> > if I have a polyfill like Web Animations API that adds "animate" method
> to
> > any Element object.
> > Can someone post an example of an @extern file for a case like this? I
> > don't imagine right now how can this be done, and maybe right not it
> can't
> > be done.
> >
> > Example code I'm using now with brackets notation is:
> >
> > indicator_content["animate"]({  > pass to animate method> });
> >
> > so I want royale user can do instead:
> >
> > indicator_content.animate({...});
> >
> > thanks
> >
> > El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 23:03, Carlos Rovira (<
> carlosrov...@apache.org>)
> > escribió:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I now Greg is busy now with an important update
> > > I can try to do it myself if Alex point me to the code I should look,
> for
> > > me it would be part of the task to make this blog example in the best
> way
> > > possible.
> > > thanks
> > >
> > > El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 22:58, Greg Dove ()
> > > escribió:
> > >
> > >> 'I'm pretty sure externs are not scanned for inject_html.  Volunteers
> are
> > >> welcome to teach the compiler to do so.'
> > >> I am happy to look into this sometime in the next few days. Just
> trying to
> > >> finish up something else first...
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, May 4, 2019 at 8:54 AM Alex Harui 
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Hi Carlos,
> > >> >
> > >> > I'm pretty sure externs are not scanned for inject_html.
> Volunteers are
> > >> > welcome to teach the compiler to do so.
> > >> >
> > >> > -Alex
> > >> >
> > >> > On 5/3/19, 1:50 PM, "Carlos Rovira" 
> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Hi,
> > >> >
> > >> > while putting the pieces together for the blog example I'm
> finding
> > >> the
> > >> > following.
> > >> >
> > >> > For classes that wraps a js code that is an intrinsic file
> needed to
> > >> > make
> > >> > the code function I think inject_html should work but I'm
> trying it
> > >> and
> > >> > seems this is not working. The code is like this:
> > >> >
> > >> > package
> > >> > {
> > >> > /**
> > >> >  * @externs
> > >> >  */
> > >> > public class hljs
> > >> > {
> > >> > /**
> > >> >  * 
> > >> >  * https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdnjs.cloudflare.com%2Fajax%2Flibs%2Fhighlight.js%2F9.12.0%2Fhighlight.min.js&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C868c28fb190b470d90c608d6d00907c6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636925134550849329&sdata=Ly6nMG8kCFvf2Dl4PCohbV8T9MPU%2F7OV2CaYrQNFXnY%3D&reserved=0
> > >> > ">
> > >> > * https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdnjs.cloudflare.com%2Fajax%2Flibs%2Fhighlight.js%2F9.12.0%2Fstyles%2Fatom-one-dark.min.css&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C868c28fb190b470d90c608d6d00907c6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636925134550849329&sdata=C512YPiiwRTU909ZEV5dOT94FELRDVSqm4mNYt58fLY%3D&reserved=0
> > >> > ">
> > >> >  * 
> > >> >  */
> > >> > public function hljs()
> > >> > {
> > >> > }
> > >> >
> > >> > public static function
> highlightBlock(block:Element):void {}
> > >> > }
> > >> > }
> > >> >
> > >> > So instead of add the inject_html in the code that calls the
> > >> methods in
> > >> > this step, I think it should  be here
> > >> >
> > >> > Make this sense?
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 9:38, Carlos Rovira (<
> > >> > carlosrov...@apache.org>)
> > >> > escribió:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Hi Alex,
> > >> > >
> > >> > > for me is difficult right now think about what would be
> better for
> > >> > > TypeScript. I think all will depend on how people interact in
> the
> > >> > following
> > >> > > months/years to show us what't the best for Royale in the long
> > >> term.
> > >> > > I think bringing TS to Royale as a first citizen language will
> > >> make
> > >> > us
> > >> >

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-asjs_MXTests #744

See 


Changes:

[carlosrovira] jewel: add dialogPolyfill as a @extern instead to access it via 
windows

--
[...truncated 42.87 KB...]

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:
 [echo] AIR_HOME is C:\adobe\air\4.0\AdobeAIRSDK

clean:
 [echo] AIR_HOME is C:\adobe\air\4.0\AdobeAIRSDK

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

clean:

thirdparty-downloads:

prepare:

check-playerglobal:

fake-playerglobal:

check-airglobal:

fake-airglobal:

compile:

Language:

clean:

check-for-tests:

clean-tests:

check-compiler-home:

check-transpiler-home:

check-compiler:

compile:
 [echo] Compiling libs/Language.swc
 [echo] ROYALE_HOME: 

 [echo] ROYALE_SWF_COMPILER_HOME: 

 [echo] ROYALE_COMPILER_HOME: 

 [java] Error occurred during initialization of VM
 [java] Could not reserve enough space for object heap
 [java] Picked up JAVA_TOOL_OPTIONS: -Dfile.encoding=UTF-8 -Xms384m -Xmx1g 
 [java] Java Result: 1

compile-js:
   [delete] Deleting: 


clean:

check-compiler-home:

check-transpiler-home:

check-compiler:

compile:
 [echo] Cross-compiling LanguageJS.swc
 [echo] ROYALE_COMPILER_HOME: 

[mkdir] Created dir: 

 [java] Error occurred during initialization of VM
 [java] Could not reserve enough space for object heap
 [java] Picked up JAVA_TOOL_OPTIONS: -Dfile.encoding=UTF-8 -Xms384m -Xmx1g 
 [java] Java Result: 1

BUILD FAILED
:652:
 The following error occurred while executing this line:
:111:
 The following error occurred while executing this line:
:311:
 The following error occurred while executing this line:
:36:
 The following error occurred while executing this line:
:67:
 Warning: Could not find file 

 to copy.

Total time: 33 seconds
Picked up JAVA_TOOL_OPTIONS: -Dfile.encoding=UTF-8 -Xms384m -Xmx1g 
Build step 'Invoke Ant' marked build as failure

Build failed in Jenkins: TourDeFlexMigration #763

See 


Changes:

[carlosrovira] jewel: add dialogPolyfill as a @extern instead to access it via 
windows

--
[...truncated 579.76 KB...]
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: reflect/reflect.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/util.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/util.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/platform.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/util.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: dom/nodetype.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: debug/error.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: asserts/asserts.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: array/array.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/engine.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: object/object.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/util.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: dom/nodetype.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: debug/error.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: asserts/asserts.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: array/array.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/browser.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: useragent/useragent.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: reflect/reflect.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: reflect/reflect.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/util.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/util.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/platform.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/util.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: dom/nodetype.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: debug/error.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: asserts/asserts.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: array/array.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/engine.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: object/object.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/util.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: dom/nodetype.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: debug/error.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: asserts/asserts.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: array/array.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/browser.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: useragent/useragent.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: reflect/reflect.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/util.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/util.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/platform.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/util.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: dom/nodetype.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: debug/error.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: asserts/asserts.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: array/array.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/engine.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: object/object.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/util.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: dom/nodetype.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: debug/error.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: asserts/asserts.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: array/array.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/browser.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: useragent/useragent.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: events/browserfeature.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: events/eventtype.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: events/eventid.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: disposable/idisposable.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: disposable/disposable.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: events/event.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: reflect/reflect.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/util.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/util.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/platform.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: string/string.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: labs/useragent/util.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename: dom/nodetype.js
[mxmlc] sorted filename:

Build failed in Jenkins: Royale_ASDoc_Example #2030

See 


Changes:

[carlosrovira] jewel: add dialogPolyfill as a @extern instead to access it via 
windows

--
[...truncated 590.61 KB...]
 [java] Compiling file: 

 [java] Compiling file: 

 [java] Compiling file: 

 [java] Compiling file: 

 [java] Compiling file: 

 [java] Compiling file: 

 [java] Compiling file: 

 [java] Compiling file: 

 [java] Compiling file: 

 [java] Compiling file: 

 [java] Compiling file: 

 [java] Compiling file: 

 [java] Compiling file: 

 [java] Compiling file: 

 [java] Compiling file: 

 [java] Compiling file: 

 [java] Compiling file: 

 [java] Compiling file: 

 [java] Compiling file: 

 [java] Compiling file: 

 [java] Compiling file: 

 [java] Compiling file: 

 [java] Compiling file:

Jenkins build is back to normal : royale-asjs #2224

See

Re: Using @extrens ( RE: Example of access external JS using Apache Royale)

2019-05-03 Thread Josh Tynjala

ActionScript does not provide a mechanism for taking an existing class and 
adding new methods or properties to it.

In this case, I don't think you have any other option than to use bracket 
syntax, like indicator_content["animate"].

- Josh

On 2019/05/03 21:08:56, Carlos Rovira  wrote: 
> Another more question I just found and don't know how to solve.
> 
> if I have a polyfill like Web Animations API that adds "animate" method to
> any Element object.
> Can someone post an example of an @extern file for a case like this? I
> don't imagine right now how can this be done, and maybe right not it can't
> be done.
> 
> Example code I'm using now with brackets notation is:
> 
> indicator_content["animate"]({  pass to animate method> });
> 
> so I want royale user can do instead:
> 
> indicator_content.animate({...});
> 
> thanks
> 
> El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 23:03, Carlos Rovira ()
> escribió:
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> > I now Greg is busy now with an important update
> > I can try to do it myself if Alex point me to the code I should look, for
> > me it would be part of the task to make this blog example in the best way
> > possible.
> > thanks
> >
> > El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 22:58, Greg Dove ()
> > escribió:
> >
> >> 'I'm pretty sure externs are not scanned for inject_html.  Volunteers are
> >> welcome to teach the compiler to do so.'
> >> I am happy to look into this sometime in the next few days. Just trying to
> >> finish up something else first...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, May 4, 2019 at 8:54 AM Alex Harui 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi Carlos,
> >> >
> >> > I'm pretty sure externs are not scanned for inject_html.  Volunteers are
> >> > welcome to teach the compiler to do so.
> >> >
> >> > -Alex
> >> >
> >> > On 5/3/19, 1:50 PM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > while putting the pieces together for the blog example I'm finding
> >> the
> >> > following.
> >> >
> >> > For classes that wraps a js code that is an intrinsic file needed to
> >> > make
> >> > the code function I think inject_html should work but I'm trying it
> >> and
> >> > seems this is not working. The code is like this:
> >> >
> >> > package
> >> > {
> >> > /**
> >> >  * @externs
> >> >  */
> >> > public class hljs
> >> > {
> >> > /**
> >> >  * 
> >> >  * https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdnjs.cloudflare.com%2Fajax%2Flibs%2Fhighlight.js%2F9.12.0%2Fhighlight.min.js&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C868c28fb190b470d90c608d6d00907c6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636925134550849329&sdata=Ly6nMG8kCFvf2Dl4PCohbV8T9MPU%2F7OV2CaYrQNFXnY%3D&reserved=0
> >> > ">
> >> > * https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdnjs.cloudflare.com%2Fajax%2Flibs%2Fhighlight.js%2F9.12.0%2Fstyles%2Fatom-one-dark.min.css&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C868c28fb190b470d90c608d6d00907c6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636925134550849329&sdata=C512YPiiwRTU909ZEV5dOT94FELRDVSqm4mNYt58fLY%3D&reserved=0
> >> > ">
> >> >  * 
> >> >  */
> >> > public function hljs()
> >> > {
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > public static function highlightBlock(block:Element):void {}
> >> > }
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > So instead of add the inject_html in the code that calls the
> >> methods in
> >> > this step, I think it should  be here
> >> >
> >> > Make this sense?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 9:38, Carlos Rovira (<
> >> > carlosrov...@apache.org>)
> >> > escribió:
> >> >
> >> > > Hi Alex,
> >> > >
> >> > > for me is difficult right now think about what would be better for
> >> > > TypeScript. I think all will depend on how people interact in the
> >> > following
> >> > > months/years to show us what't the best for Royale in the long
> >> term.
> >> > > I think bringing TS to Royale as a first citizen language will
> >> make
> >> > us
> >> > > more accesible and people will considere us more since TS is the
> >> > language
> >> > > people choose over AS3 (although I for example like AS3 more and
> >> if
> >> > we get
> >> > > few things like generics we'll be great to compete with TS), but
> >> > this is a
> >> > > very complex task, so I know this hardly be done unless someone
> >> > comes with
> >> > > time and knowledge to make it happen. And if we think about things
> >> > that are
> >> > > complex and hard to add and see the importance/value it will
> >> bring to
> >> > > Royale I think a WebAssembly target will be over TS since it
> >> clearly
> >> > > enhance the Roayle purpose of generate multiple sources.
> >> > >
> >> > > In the other hand, make TS just to do TypeDefs, again maybe users
> >> > should
> >> > > express here if it could be needed, I can't say right now h

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-asjs #2223

See 


Changes:

[carlosrovira] jewel: add dialogPolyfill as a @extern instead to access it via 
windows

--
[...truncated 691.29 KB...]
 [echo] ${env.ROYALE_DOWNLOAD_CACHE}
 [echo] Need file: ${still_no_file}

get-from-cache-if-needed:

fail-if-not-found:

getfile:
  [get] Getting: 
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/royale-extras/closure-compiler/royale/contrib/nodejs/fs.js
  [get] To: C:\Program Files 
(x86)\Jenkins\workspace\royale-typedefs\node\target\downloads\closure-compiler-master\contrib\nodejs\fs.js

double-check-file:
 [echo] ${env.ROYALE_DOWNLOAD_CACHE}
 [echo] Need file: ${still_no_file}

get-from-cache-if-needed:

fail-if-not-found:

getfile:
  [get] Getting: 
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/royale-extras/closure-compiler/royale/contrib/nodejs/globals.js
  [get] To: C:\Program Files 
(x86)\Jenkins\workspace\royale-typedefs\node\target\downloads\closure-compiler-master\contrib\nodejs\globals.js

double-check-file:
 [echo] ${env.ROYALE_DOWNLOAD_CACHE}
 [echo] Need file: ${still_no_file}

get-from-cache-if-needed:

fail-if-not-found:

getfile:
  [get] Getting: 
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/royale-extras/closure-compiler/royale/contrib/nodejs/http.js
  [get] To: C:\Program Files 
(x86)\Jenkins\workspace\royale-typedefs\node\target\downloads\closure-compiler-master\contrib\nodejs\http.js

double-check-file:
 [echo] ${env.ROYALE_DOWNLOAD_CACHE}
 [echo] Need file: ${still_no_file}

get-from-cache-if-needed:

fail-if-not-found:

getfile:
  [get] Getting: 
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/royale-extras/closure-compiler/royale/contrib/nodejs/https.js
  [get] To: C:\Program Files 
(x86)\Jenkins\workspace\royale-typedefs\node\target\downloads\closure-compiler-master\contrib\nodejs\https.js

double-check-file:
 [echo] ${env.ROYALE_DOWNLOAD_CACHE}
 [echo] Need file: ${still_no_file}

get-from-cache-if-needed:

fail-if-not-found:

getfile:
  [get] Getting: 
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/royale-extras/closure-compiler/royale/contrib/nodejs/net.js
  [get] To: C:\Program Files 
(x86)\Jenkins\workspace\royale-typedefs\node\target\downloads\closure-compiler-master\contrib\nodejs\net.js

double-check-file:
 [echo] ${env.ROYALE_DOWNLOAD_CACHE}
 [echo] Need file: ${still_no_file}

get-from-cache-if-needed:

fail-if-not-found:

getfile:
  [get] Getting: 
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/royale-extras/closure-compiler/royale/contrib/nodejs/os.js
  [get] To: C:\Program Files 
(x86)\Jenkins\workspace\royale-typedefs\node\target\downloads\closure-compiler-master\contrib\nodejs\os.js

double-check-file:
 [echo] ${env.ROYALE_DOWNLOAD_CACHE}
 [echo] Need file: ${still_no_file}

get-from-cache-if-needed:

fail-if-not-found:

getfile:
  [get] Getting: 
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/royale-extras/closure-compiler/royale/contrib/nodejs/path.js
  [get] To: C:\Program Files 
(x86)\Jenkins\workspace\royale-typedefs\node\target\downloads\closure-compiler-master\contrib\nodejs\path.js

double-check-file:
 [echo] ${env.ROYALE_DOWNLOAD_CACHE}
 [echo] Need file: ${still_no_file}

get-from-cache-if-needed:

fail-if-not-found:

getfile:
  [get] Getting: 
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/royale-extras/closure-compiler/royale/contrib/nodejs/punycode.js
  [get] To: C:\Program Files 
(x86)\Jenkins\workspace\royale-typedefs\node\target\downloads\closure-compiler-master\contrib\nodejs\punycode.js

double-check-file:
 [echo] ${env.ROYALE_DOWNLOAD_CACHE}
 [echo] Need file: ${still_no_file}

get-from-cache-if-needed:

fail-if-not-found:

getfile:
  [get] Getting: 
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/royale-extras/closure-compiler/royale/contrib/nodejs/querystring.js
  [get] To: C:\Program Files 
(x86)\Jenkins\workspace\royale-typedefs\node\target\downloads\closure-compiler-master\contrib\nodejs\querystring.js

double-check-file:
 [echo] ${env.ROYALE_DOWNLOAD_CACHE}
 [echo] Need file: ${still_no_file}

get-from-cache-if-needed:

fail-if-not-found:

getfile:
  [get] Getting: 
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/royale-extras/closure-compiler/royale/contrib/nodejs/readline.js
  [get] To: C:\Program Files 
(x86)\Jenkins\workspace\royale-typedefs\node\target\downloads\closure-compiler-master\contrib\nodejs\readline.js

double-check-file:
 [echo] ${env.ROYALE_DOWNLOAD_CACHE}
 [echo] Need file: ${still_no_file}

get-from-cache-if-needed:

fail-if-not-found:

getfile:
  [get] Getting: 
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/royale-extras/closure-compiler/royale/contrib/nodejs/repl.js
  [get] To: C:\Program Files 
(x86)\Jenkins\workspace\royale-typedefs\node\target\downloads\closure-compiler-master\contrib\nodejs\repl.js

double-check-file:
 [echo] ${env.ROYALE_DOWNLOAD_CACHE}
 [echo] Need file: ${still_no_file}

get-from

Re: Using @extrens ( RE: Example of access external JS using Apache Royale)

Another more question I just found and don't know how to solve.

if I have a polyfill like Web Animations API that adds "animate" method to
any Element object.
Can someone post an example of an @extern file for a case like this? I
don't imagine right now how can this be done, and maybe right not it can't
be done.

Example code I'm using now with brackets notation is:

indicator_content["animate"]({  });

so I want royale user can do instead:

indicator_content.animate({...});

thanks

El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 23:03, Carlos Rovira ()
escribió:

> Hi,
>
> I now Greg is busy now with an important update
> I can try to do it myself if Alex point me to the code I should look, for
> me it would be part of the task to make this blog example in the best way
> possible.
> thanks
>
> El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 22:58, Greg Dove ()
> escribió:
>
>> 'I'm pretty sure externs are not scanned for inject_html.  Volunteers are
>> welcome to teach the compiler to do so.'
>> I am happy to look into this sometime in the next few days. Just trying to
>> finish up something else first...
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, May 4, 2019 at 8:54 AM Alex Harui 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Carlos,
>> >
>> > I'm pretty sure externs are not scanned for inject_html.  Volunteers are
>> > welcome to teach the compiler to do so.
>> >
>> > -Alex
>> >
>> > On 5/3/19, 1:50 PM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > while putting the pieces together for the blog example I'm finding
>> the
>> > following.
>> >
>> > For classes that wraps a js code that is an intrinsic file needed to
>> > make
>> > the code function I think inject_html should work but I'm trying it
>> and
>> > seems this is not working. The code is like this:
>> >
>> > package
>> > {
>> > /**
>> >  * @externs
>> >  */
>> > public class hljs
>> > {
>> > /**
>> >  * 
>> >  * https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdnjs.cloudflare.com%2Fajax%2Flibs%2Fhighlight.js%2F9.12.0%2Fhighlight.min.js&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C868c28fb190b470d90c608d6d00907c6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636925134550849329&sdata=Ly6nMG8kCFvf2Dl4PCohbV8T9MPU%2F7OV2CaYrQNFXnY%3D&reserved=0
>> > ">
>> > * https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdnjs.cloudflare.com%2Fajax%2Flibs%2Fhighlight.js%2F9.12.0%2Fstyles%2Fatom-one-dark.min.css&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C868c28fb190b470d90c608d6d00907c6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636925134550849329&sdata=C512YPiiwRTU909ZEV5dOT94FELRDVSqm4mNYt58fLY%3D&reserved=0
>> > ">
>> >  * 
>> >  */
>> > public function hljs()
>> > {
>> > }
>> >
>> > public static function highlightBlock(block:Element):void {}
>> > }
>> > }
>> >
>> > So instead of add the inject_html in the code that calls the
>> methods in
>> > this step, I think it should  be here
>> >
>> > Make this sense?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 9:38, Carlos Rovira (<
>> > carlosrov...@apache.org>)
>> > escribió:
>> >
>> > > Hi Alex,
>> > >
>> > > for me is difficult right now think about what would be better for
>> > > TypeScript. I think all will depend on how people interact in the
>> > following
>> > > months/years to show us what't the best for Royale in the long
>> term.
>> > > I think bringing TS to Royale as a first citizen language will
>> make
>> > us
>> > > more accesible and people will considere us more since TS is the
>> > language
>> > > people choose over AS3 (although I for example like AS3 more and
>> if
>> > we get
>> > > few things like generics we'll be great to compete with TS), but
>> > this is a
>> > > very complex task, so I know this hardly be done unless someone
>> > comes with
>> > > time and knowledge to make it happen. And if we think about things
>> > that are
>> > > complex and hard to add and see the importance/value it will
>> bring to
>> > > Royale I think a WebAssembly target will be over TS since it
>> clearly
>> > > enhance the Roayle purpose of generate multiple sources.
>> > >
>> > > In the other hand, make TS just to do TypeDefs, again maybe users
>> > should
>> > > express here if it could be needed, I can't say right now how much
>> > this
>> > > could be important for Royale, so maybe time and users will let us
>> > know
>> > > what to do.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > El jue., 2 may. 2019 a las 22:44, Alex Harui
>> > ()
>> > > escribió:
>> > >
>> > >> The word "package" has many meanings.  In AS3 it is a way of
>> > avoiding API
>> > >> name collisions.  AIUI, an AS3 package in SWF code has no object
>> or
>> > >> function representation.  It effectively just creates a longer
>> > "qualified
>> > >> name".  IOW, in a SWF, i

Re: Using @extrens ( RE: Example of access external JS using Apache Royale)

Hi,

I now Greg is busy now with an important update
I can try to do it myself if Alex point me to the code I should look, for
me it would be part of the task to make this blog example in the best way
possible.
thanks

El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 22:58, Greg Dove ()
escribió:

> 'I'm pretty sure externs are not scanned for inject_html.  Volunteers are
> welcome to teach the compiler to do so.'
> I am happy to look into this sometime in the next few days. Just trying to
> finish up something else first...
>
>
>
> On Sat, May 4, 2019 at 8:54 AM Alex Harui 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Carlos,
> >
> > I'm pretty sure externs are not scanned for inject_html.  Volunteers are
> > welcome to teach the compiler to do so.
> >
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 5/3/19, 1:50 PM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > while putting the pieces together for the blog example I'm finding
> the
> > following.
> >
> > For classes that wraps a js code that is an intrinsic file needed to
> > make
> > the code function I think inject_html should work but I'm trying it
> and
> > seems this is not working. The code is like this:
> >
> > package
> > {
> > /**
> >  * @externs
> >  */
> > public class hljs
> > {
> > /**
> >  * 
> >  * https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdnjs.cloudflare.com%2Fajax%2Flibs%2Fhighlight.js%2F9.12.0%2Fhighlight.min.js&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C868c28fb190b470d90c608d6d00907c6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636925134550849329&sdata=Ly6nMG8kCFvf2Dl4PCohbV8T9MPU%2F7OV2CaYrQNFXnY%3D&reserved=0
> > ">
> > * https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdnjs.cloudflare.com%2Fajax%2Flibs%2Fhighlight.js%2F9.12.0%2Fstyles%2Fatom-one-dark.min.css&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C868c28fb190b470d90c608d6d00907c6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636925134550849329&sdata=C512YPiiwRTU909ZEV5dOT94FELRDVSqm4mNYt58fLY%3D&reserved=0
> > ">
> >  * 
> >  */
> > public function hljs()
> > {
> > }
> >
> > public static function highlightBlock(block:Element):void {}
> > }
> > }
> >
> > So instead of add the inject_html in the code that calls the methods
> in
> > this step, I think it should  be here
> >
> > Make this sense?
> >
> >
> >
> > El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 9:38, Carlos Rovira (<
> > carlosrov...@apache.org>)
> > escribió:
> >
> > > Hi Alex,
> > >
> > > for me is difficult right now think about what would be better for
> > > TypeScript. I think all will depend on how people interact in the
> > following
> > > months/years to show us what't the best for Royale in the long
> term.
> > > I think bringing TS to Royale as a first citizen language will make
> > us
> > > more accesible and people will considere us more since TS is the
> > language
> > > people choose over AS3 (although I for example like AS3 more and if
> > we get
> > > few things like generics we'll be great to compete with TS), but
> > this is a
> > > very complex task, so I know this hardly be done unless someone
> > comes with
> > > time and knowledge to make it happen. And if we think about things
> > that are
> > > complex and hard to add and see the importance/value it will bring
> to
> > > Royale I think a WebAssembly target will be over TS since it
> clearly
> > > enhance the Roayle purpose of generate multiple sources.
> > >
> > > In the other hand, make TS just to do TypeDefs, again maybe users
> > should
> > > express here if it could be needed, I can't say right now how much
> > this
> > > could be important for Royale, so maybe time and users will let us
> > know
> > > what to do.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > El jue., 2 may. 2019 a las 22:44, Alex Harui
> > ()
> > > escribió:
> > >
> > >> The word "package" has many meanings.  In AS3 it is a way of
> > avoiding API
> > >> name collisions.  AIUI, an AS3 package in SWF code has no object
> or
> > >> function representation.  It effectively just creates a longer
> > "qualified
> > >> name".  IOW, in a SWF, if there is a class "mx.core.UIComponent",
> > there is
> > >> no "mx.core" object you can iterate to see all of the classes.
> > >>
> > >> For Royale's JS output, an AS3 package has an object
> representation
> > in
> > >> debug mode because we use the same pattern as Google Closure.  So
> > there
> > >> really would be an "mx" Object with a "core" property object with
> a
> > >> UIComponent function that serves as the constructor.  However, in
> > >> production, these package objects are often collapsed, so it is
> > best to not
> > >> assume the objects exist.
> > >>
> > >> Then there are Node/NPM packages and modules and other sorts of
>

Re: [JOB] Moonshine-IDE.com is hiring contractors to bring Apache Royale to version 1.0

Hi,

It is a bit disappointing that there weren't offers, but I guess I'm not too
surprised. I think there are a couple of factors here:

1) I still think people haven't realized that no big corporation like Adobe is
driving Royale. With Adobe Flex, all you had to do is wait for the next
release. I don't think people realize that with Apache Royale, we need folks
to participate.
2) I think people are busy
3) I think we haven't made it clear enough how to make a difference if you have
a spare hour or two. Where can folks go to get all of the things they need to
make a 20 minute change to our docs if they only have an hour to spare? We
might need to make it easier for folks to make small contributions. Any
volunteers to help with that?

I'd help, but I'm overloaded right now with other tasks.

-Alex

On 5/3/19, 2:57 AM, "Olaf Krueger" wrote:

Hi,

for those who would like to help but think they do not have the needed
skills:
I think there are some tasks which could be achieved without any knowledge
of Royale.

E.g. the consolidation and beautification of the docs could be done without
any knowledge of Royale.

Just to mention it...

Thanks,
Olaf

--
Sent from:
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C996a4ae6ae0846f15dff08d6cfadb21f%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636924742269897098&sdata=5KblIQ728s91cmSHAoqxPBYhKPb3VH40o%2BKYU%2F9Wwuk%3D&reserved=0

Re: Using @extrens ( RE: Example of access external JS using Apache Royale)

2019-05-03 Thread Greg Dove

'I'm pretty sure externs are not scanned for inject_html.  Volunteers are
welcome to teach the compiler to do so.'
I am happy to look into this sometime in the next few days. Just trying to
finish up something else first...



On Sat, May 4, 2019 at 8:54 AM Alex Harui  wrote:

> Hi Carlos,
>
> I'm pretty sure externs are not scanned for inject_html.  Volunteers are
> welcome to teach the compiler to do so.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 5/3/19, 1:50 PM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> while putting the pieces together for the blog example I'm finding the
> following.
>
> For classes that wraps a js code that is an intrinsic file needed to
> make
> the code function I think inject_html should work but I'm trying it and
> seems this is not working. The code is like this:
>
> package
> {
> /**
>  * @externs
>  */
> public class hljs
> {
> /**
>  * 
>  * https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdnjs.cloudflare.com%2Fajax%2Flibs%2Fhighlight.js%2F9.12.0%2Fhighlight.min.js&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C868c28fb190b470d90c608d6d00907c6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636925134550849329&sdata=Ly6nMG8kCFvf2Dl4PCohbV8T9MPU%2F7OV2CaYrQNFXnY%3D&reserved=0
> ">
> * https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdnjs.cloudflare.com%2Fajax%2Flibs%2Fhighlight.js%2F9.12.0%2Fstyles%2Fatom-one-dark.min.css&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C868c28fb190b470d90c608d6d00907c6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636925134550849329&sdata=C512YPiiwRTU909ZEV5dOT94FELRDVSqm4mNYt58fLY%3D&reserved=0
> ">
>  * 
>  */
> public function hljs()
> {
> }
>
> public static function highlightBlock(block:Element):void {}
> }
> }
>
> So instead of add the inject_html in the code that calls the methods in
> this step, I think it should  be here
>
> Make this sense?
>
>
>
> El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 9:38, Carlos Rovira (<
> carlosrov...@apache.org>)
> escribió:
>
> > Hi Alex,
> >
> > for me is difficult right now think about what would be better for
> > TypeScript. I think all will depend on how people interact in the
> following
> > months/years to show us what't the best for Royale in the long term.
> > I think bringing TS to Royale as a first citizen language will make
> us
> > more accesible and people will considere us more since TS is the
> language
> > people choose over AS3 (although I for example like AS3 more and if
> we get
> > few things like generics we'll be great to compete with TS), but
> this is a
> > very complex task, so I know this hardly be done unless someone
> comes with
> > time and knowledge to make it happen. And if we think about things
> that are
> > complex and hard to add and see the importance/value it will bring to
> > Royale I think a WebAssembly target will be over TS since it clearly
> > enhance the Roayle purpose of generate multiple sources.
> >
> > In the other hand, make TS just to do TypeDefs, again maybe users
> should
> > express here if it could be needed, I can't say right now how much
> this
> > could be important for Royale, so maybe time and users will let us
> know
> > what to do.
> >
> >
> >
> > El jue., 2 may. 2019 a las 22:44, Alex Harui
> ()
> > escribió:
> >
> >> The word "package" has many meanings.  In AS3 it is a way of
> avoiding API
> >> name collisions.  AIUI, an AS3 package in SWF code has no object or
> >> function representation.  It effectively just creates a longer
> "qualified
> >> name".  IOW, in a SWF, if there is a class "mx.core.UIComponent",
> there is
> >> no "mx.core" object you can iterate to see all of the classes.
> >>
> >> For Royale's JS output, an AS3 package has an object representation
> in
> >> debug mode because we use the same pattern as Google Closure.  So
> there
> >> really would be an "mx" Object with a "core" property object with a
> >> UIComponent function that serves as the constructor.  However, in
> >> production, these package objects are often collapsed, so it is
> best to not
> >> assume the objects exist.
> >>
> >> Then there are Node/NPM packages and modules and other sorts of
> >> "packaging".   But in this thread I was only referencing AS3
> Packages.
> >>
> >> Also in this thread I mentioned TypeScript.  While Royale could
> support
> >> TypeScript as Carlos mentioned, as an alternative to writing AS3, I
> only
> >> mentioned it because the existence of a TypeScript definition for a
> library
> >> indicates that the library can have a strongly-typed API surface
> which
> >> means it is highly likely you can create Royale typedefs for that
> library,
> >> and becau

Re: Using @extrens ( RE: Example of access external JS using Apache Royale)

Hi Carlos,

I'm pretty sure externs are not scanned for inject_html.  Volunteers are 
welcome to teach the compiler to do so.

-Alex

On 5/3/19, 1:50 PM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:

Hi,

while putting the pieces together for the blog example I'm finding the
following.

For classes that wraps a js code that is an intrinsic file needed to make
the code function I think inject_html should work but I'm trying it and
seems this is not working. The code is like this:

package
{
/**
 * @externs
 */
public class hljs
{
/**
 * 
 * https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdnjs.cloudflare.com%2Fajax%2Flibs%2Fhighlight.js%2F9.12.0%2Fhighlight.min.js&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C868c28fb190b470d90c608d6d00907c6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636925134550849329&sdata=Ly6nMG8kCFvf2Dl4PCohbV8T9MPU%2F7OV2CaYrQNFXnY%3D&reserved=0
">
* https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdnjs.cloudflare.com%2Fajax%2Flibs%2Fhighlight.js%2F9.12.0%2Fstyles%2Fatom-one-dark.min.css&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C868c28fb190b470d90c608d6d00907c6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636925134550849329&sdata=C512YPiiwRTU909ZEV5dOT94FELRDVSqm4mNYt58fLY%3D&reserved=0
">
 * 
 */
public function hljs()
{
}

public static function highlightBlock(block:Element):void {}
}
}

So instead of add the inject_html in the code that calls the methods in
this step, I think it should  be here

Make this sense?



El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 9:38, Carlos Rovira ()
escribió:

> Hi Alex,
>
> for me is difficult right now think about what would be better for
> TypeScript. I think all will depend on how people interact in the 
following
> months/years to show us what't the best for Royale in the long term.
> I think bringing TS to Royale as a first citizen language will make us
> more accesible and people will considere us more since TS is the language
> people choose over AS3 (although I for example like AS3 more and if we get
> few things like generics we'll be great to compete with TS), but this is a
> very complex task, so I know this hardly be done unless someone comes with
> time and knowledge to make it happen. And if we think about things that 
are
> complex and hard to add and see the importance/value it will bring to
> Royale I think a WebAssembly target will be over TS since it clearly
> enhance the Roayle purpose of generate multiple sources.
>
> In the other hand, make TS just to do TypeDefs, again maybe users should
> express here if it could be needed, I can't say right now how much this
> could be important for Royale, so maybe time and users will let us know
> what to do.
>
>
>
> El jue., 2 may. 2019 a las 22:44, Alex Harui ()
> escribió:
>
>> The word "package" has many meanings.  In AS3 it is a way of avoiding API
>> name collisions.  AIUI, an AS3 package in SWF code has no object or
>> function representation.  It effectively just creates a longer "qualified
>> name".  IOW, in a SWF, if there is a class "mx.core.UIComponent", there 
is
>> no "mx.core" object you can iterate to see all of the classes.
>>
>> For Royale's JS output, an AS3 package has an object representation in
>> debug mode because we use the same pattern as Google Closure.  So there
>> really would be an "mx" Object with a "core" property object with a
>> UIComponent function that serves as the constructor.  However, in
>> production, these package objects are often collapsed, so it is best to 
not
>> assume the objects exist.
>>
>> Then there are Node/NPM packages and modules and other sorts of
>> "packaging".   But in this thread I was only referencing AS3 Packages.
>>
>> Also in this thread I mentioned TypeScript.  While Royale could support
>> TypeScript as Carlos mentioned, as an alternative to writing AS3, I only
>> mentioned it because the existence of a TypeScript definition for a 
library
>> indicates that the library can have a strongly-typed API surface which
>> means it is highly likely you can create Royale typedefs for that 
library,
>> and because I thought that Josh's converter was still working.  
Supporting
>> TypeScript as an alternative programming language in Royale is a
>> significant chunk of work and is not something I plan to work on at this
>> time.  But I was only mentioning using TypeScript to generate typedefs,
>> which is a different effort and could be a smaller effort and give us
>> access to a huge set of typedefs.  I have no plans to work on that at 
this
>> time either, but I could

Re: Using @extrens ( RE: Example of access external JS using Apache Royale)

Hi,

while putting the pieces together for the blog example I'm finding the
following.

For classes that wraps a js code that is an intrinsic file needed to make
the code function I think inject_html should work but I'm trying it and
seems this is not working. The code is like this:

package
{
/**
 * @externs
 */
public class hljs
{
/**
 * 
 * https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/highlight.js/9.12.0/highlight.min.js
">
* https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/highlight.js/9.12.0/styles/atom-one-dark.min.css
">
 * 
 */
public function hljs()
{
}

public static function highlightBlock(block:Element):void {}
}
}

So instead of add the inject_html in the code that calls the methods in
this step, I think it should  be here

Make this sense?



El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 9:38, Carlos Rovira ()
escribió:

> Hi Alex,
>
> for me is difficult right now think about what would be better for
> TypeScript. I think all will depend on how people interact in the following
> months/years to show us what't the best for Royale in the long term.
> I think bringing TS to Royale as a first citizen language will make us
> more accesible and people will considere us more since TS is the language
> people choose over AS3 (although I for example like AS3 more and if we get
> few things like generics we'll be great to compete with TS), but this is a
> very complex task, so I know this hardly be done unless someone comes with
> time and knowledge to make it happen. And if we think about things that are
> complex and hard to add and see the importance/value it will bring to
> Royale I think a WebAssembly target will be over TS since it clearly
> enhance the Roayle purpose of generate multiple sources.
>
> In the other hand, make TS just to do TypeDefs, again maybe users should
> express here if it could be needed, I can't say right now how much this
> could be important for Royale, so maybe time and users will let us know
> what to do.
>
>
>
> El jue., 2 may. 2019 a las 22:44, Alex Harui ()
> escribió:
>
>> The word "package" has many meanings.  In AS3 it is a way of avoiding API
>> name collisions.  AIUI, an AS3 package in SWF code has no object or
>> function representation.  It effectively just creates a longer "qualified
>> name".  IOW, in a SWF, if there is a class "mx.core.UIComponent", there is
>> no "mx.core" object you can iterate to see all of the classes.
>>
>> For Royale's JS output, an AS3 package has an object representation in
>> debug mode because we use the same pattern as Google Closure.  So there
>> really would be an "mx" Object with a "core" property object with a
>> UIComponent function that serves as the constructor.  However, in
>> production, these package objects are often collapsed, so it is best to not
>> assume the objects exist.
>>
>> Then there are Node/NPM packages and modules and other sorts of
>> "packaging".   But in this thread I was only referencing AS3 Packages.
>>
>> Also in this thread I mentioned TypeScript.  While Royale could support
>> TypeScript as Carlos mentioned, as an alternative to writing AS3, I only
>> mentioned it because the existence of a TypeScript definition for a library
>> indicates that the library can have a strongly-typed API surface which
>> means it is highly likely you can create Royale typedefs for that library,
>> and because I thought that Josh's converter was still working.  Supporting
>> TypeScript as an alternative programming language in Royale is a
>> significant chunk of work and is not something I plan to work on at this
>> time.  But I was only mentioning using TypeScript to generate typedefs,
>> which is a different effort and could be a smaller effort and give us
>> access to a huge set of typedefs.  I have no plans to work on that at this
>> time either, but I could imagine myself working on that if there was enough
>> demand for it.
>>
>> HTH,
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 5/2/19, 11:24 AM, "Dany Dhondt"  wrote:
>>
>> Hi Josh,
>>
>> Aren’t most of the packages just functions?
>> In ES6, you’d import packages as
>> Import { myFunct, myVar } from ‘my-package’
>> In older javascript you’d:
>> const myPackagePointer = require(‘my-package’)
>>
>> So your ‘fun’ example sounds like heaven to me! This is exactly what
>> we need.
>>
>> About Typescript: do we need that at all? I think, but maybe this
>> goes beyond my technical knowledge, all node packages are compiled into
>> plain old javascript functions. Typescript is only needed for authoring the
>> packages. Once compiled there’s no trace of Typescript at all. If this is
>> indeed true, then we shouldn’t bother about Typescript at all, and just
>> concentrate on incorporating the pure javascript libs.
>>
>> Dany
>>
>> > Op 2 mei 2019, om 19:57 heeft Josh Tynjala 
>> het volgende geschreven:
>> >
>> > Just for fun, here's another way that you could create a typedef
>> for hl

Re: The start of a FullCalendar Royale component...

Shared here! :)

https://twitter.com/ApacheRoyale/status/1124349214127947776

El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 18:13, Carlos Rovira ()
escribió:

> Great example Andrew! Thanks for sharing!! :)
>
> El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 8:49, Piotr Zarzycki (<
> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>) escribió:
>
>> Hi Dany,
>>
>> And this comes to conclusion as well - Hey why we cannot bump our version
>> to 1.0 - whatever gap user will have he can literally fill with existing
>> JS
>> components.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Piotr
>>
>> pt., 3 maj 2019 o 08:28 Dany Dhondt 
>> napisał(a):
>>
>> > The (very) good news is that is IS possible. To me as a developer (and
>> > others we’re hoping to use Royale), it is vital to know that it can be
>> > done. At some point in developing an application with Royale, we’ll
>> stumble
>> > on some functionality or component which just isn’t available in
>> Royale. At
>> > that point, it is simply not acceptable to say ‘well hey, it can’t be
>> done
>> > right now but come back in a year or so’.
>> > FullCalendar is a good example because every developer will need a
>> > calendar component sooner or later. FC is becoming a standard in
>> javascript
>> > (+70k downloads a week).
>> > @Andrew, I’ll post the FullCalendar question on StackOverflow. Could you
>> > answer it? That way, Royale will emerge too when people search on the
>> > FullCalendar tag.
>> > Another question: did you use the 4.x version of FC or the (older) 3.x
>> > version?
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> > Dany
>> >
>> > > Op 3 mei 2019, om 07:55 heeft Piotr Zarzycki <
>> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
>> > het volgende geschreven:
>> > >
>> > > Hi Andrew,
>> > >
>> > > First of all Thank you for using Moonshine! I think there is one good
>> > > advantage to going by your approach instead typedefs. You can redefine
>> > API
>> > > to completely new if you don't like in the original component. Those
>> new
>> > > API may have a bit more of a AS3 style etc.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Piotr
>> > >
>> > > On Fri, May 3, 2019, 6:26 AM Alex Harui 
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> Hi Andrew,
>> > >>
>> > >> That's cool!  Thank you for demonstrating that such a thing can be
>> done.
>> > >>
>> > >> I'm not sure there is a "best approach" for doing something like
>> this.
>> > It
>> > >> really depends on how much time you want to put into it.  If you
>> want to
>> > >> use a 3rd-party component in your app and only want to use a few
>> APIs,
>> > then
>> > >> the approach you took is fine and solves your problem quickly.
>> > >>
>> > >> On the other hand, if you want to make it complete and offer it to
>> > others
>> > >> to use you may find that creating typedefs for the options and
>> calendar
>> > >> objects and other objects you are wrapping will eliminate the need to
>> > use
>> > >> bracket access such as  'options["defaultView"] = _defaultView;' and
>> > thus
>> > >> allow the IDE to offer better code-assist and catch typos so you
>> don't
>> > >> later waste time debugging why 'options["defaultview"]' is not
>> working.
>> > >>
>> > >> Thanks,
>> > >> -Alex
>> > >>
>> > >> On 5/2/19, 2:07 PM, "Frost, Andrew" 
>> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>Hi
>> > >>
>> > >>Something that Dany Dhondt wrote recently, about using the
>> > >> "fullcalendar" React component, got me to wondering how easy it was
>> to
>> > wrap
>> > >> these sorts of third party components into Royale.
>> > >>
>> > >>The answer turned out to be: it's pretty straightforward. I'm not
>> > sure
>> > >> I've used the best approach (no 'typedefs' or anything) but I've
>> created
>> > >> some wrapper classes that can be used from MXML to drop in a calendar
>> > >> component and add events etc. Lots of extra work to do to get it to
>> the
>> > >> stage where it's as functional as the JS/React etc versions, but the
>> > lack
>> > >> here is (a) time and (b) documentation (I can't see a full API for
>> the
>> > >> various FullCalendar classes..!)
>> > >>
>> > >>Hope it's useful for folk to see how quickly this can be done...
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> >
>> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fajwfrost%2Froyale-playground%2Ftree%2Fmaster%2FCalendarProject&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C19735c4310c64d1152b808d6cf423d43%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636924280737194314&sdata=xmrL7z1UB9Mh3FpmbD6iGy9JORZ0YDmXjdiZvDJRm1Y%3D&reserved=0
>> > >>(the wrapper classes are in src/io/fullcalendar, and the mxml file
>> > >> that uses them is just src/CalendarProject.mxml .. I've been using
>> > >> Moonshine and just uploaded the whole project so there's lots of
>> > irrelevant
>> > >> files in there too!)
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>thanks
>> > >>
>> > >>   Andrew
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>>
>> Piotr Zarzycki
>>
>> Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
>> *
>>
>
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira
>
>

-- 
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira

Re: The start of a FullCalendar Royale component...

Great example Andrew! Thanks for sharing!! :)

El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 8:49, Piotr Zarzycki ()
escribió:

> Hi Dany,
>
> And this comes to conclusion as well - Hey why we cannot bump our version
> to 1.0 - whatever gap user will have he can literally fill with existing JS
> components.
>
> Thanks,
> Piotr
>
> pt., 3 maj 2019 o 08:28 Dany Dhondt 
> napisał(a):
>
> > The (very) good news is that is IS possible. To me as a developer (and
> > others we’re hoping to use Royale), it is vital to know that it can be
> > done. At some point in developing an application with Royale, we’ll
> stumble
> > on some functionality or component which just isn’t available in Royale.
> At
> > that point, it is simply not acceptable to say ‘well hey, it can’t be
> done
> > right now but come back in a year or so’.
> > FullCalendar is a good example because every developer will need a
> > calendar component sooner or later. FC is becoming a standard in
> javascript
> > (+70k downloads a week).
> > @Andrew, I’ll post the FullCalendar question on StackOverflow. Could you
> > answer it? That way, Royale will emerge too when people search on the
> > FullCalendar tag.
> > Another question: did you use the 4.x version of FC or the (older) 3.x
> > version?
> >
> > Thanks
> > Dany
> >
> > > Op 3 mei 2019, om 07:55 heeft Piotr Zarzycki <
> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
> > het volgende geschreven:
> > >
> > > Hi Andrew,
> > >
> > > First of all Thank you for using Moonshine! I think there is one good
> > > advantage to going by your approach instead typedefs. You can redefine
> > API
> > > to completely new if you don't like in the original component. Those
> new
> > > API may have a bit more of a AS3 style etc.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Piotr
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 3, 2019, 6:26 AM Alex Harui 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi Andrew,
> > >>
> > >> That's cool!  Thank you for demonstrating that such a thing can be
> done.
> > >>
> > >> I'm not sure there is a "best approach" for doing something like this.
> > It
> > >> really depends on how much time you want to put into it.  If you want
> to
> > >> use a 3rd-party component in your app and only want to use a few APIs,
> > then
> > >> the approach you took is fine and solves your problem quickly.
> > >>
> > >> On the other hand, if you want to make it complete and offer it to
> > others
> > >> to use you may find that creating typedefs for the options and
> calendar
> > >> objects and other objects you are wrapping will eliminate the need to
> > use
> > >> bracket access such as  'options["defaultView"] = _defaultView;' and
> > thus
> > >> allow the IDE to offer better code-assist and catch typos so you don't
> > >> later waste time debugging why 'options["defaultview"]' is not
> working.
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> -Alex
> > >>
> > >> On 5/2/19, 2:07 PM, "Frost, Andrew"  wrote:
> > >>
> > >>Hi
> > >>
> > >>Something that Dany Dhondt wrote recently, about using the
> > >> "fullcalendar" React component, got me to wondering how easy it was to
> > wrap
> > >> these sorts of third party components into Royale.
> > >>
> > >>The answer turned out to be: it's pretty straightforward. I'm not
> > sure
> > >> I've used the best approach (no 'typedefs' or anything) but I've
> created
> > >> some wrapper classes that can be used from MXML to drop in a calendar
> > >> component and add events etc. Lots of extra work to do to get it to
> the
> > >> stage where it's as functional as the JS/React etc versions, but the
> > lack
> > >> here is (a) time and (b) documentation (I can't see a full API for the
> > >> various FullCalendar classes..!)
> > >>
> > >>Hope it's useful for folk to see how quickly this can be done...
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fajwfrost%2Froyale-playground%2Ftree%2Fmaster%2FCalendarProject&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C19735c4310c64d1152b808d6cf423d43%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636924280737194314&sdata=xmrL7z1UB9Mh3FpmbD6iGy9JORZ0YDmXjdiZvDJRm1Y%3D&reserved=0
> > >>(the wrapper classes are in src/io/fullcalendar, and the mxml file
> > >> that uses them is just src/CalendarProject.mxml .. I've been using
> > >> Moonshine and just uploaded the whole project so there's lots of
> > irrelevant
> > >> files in there too!)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>thanks
> > >>
> > >>   Andrew
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> >
>
> --
>
> Piotr Zarzycki
>
> Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
> *
>


-- 
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-asjs_MXTests #743

See 


--
[...truncated 2.04 MB...]
[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file:

Re: [JOB] Moonshine-IDE.com is hiring contractors to bring Apache Royale to version 1.0

2019-05-03 Thread Olaf Krueger

Hi,

for those who would like to help but think they do not have the needed
skills:
I think there are some tasks which could be achieved without any knowledge
of Royale.

E.g. the consolidation and beautification of the docs could be done without
any knowledge of Royale.

Just to mention it...

Thanks,
Olaf




--
Sent from: http://apache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble.com/

Re: [JOB] Moonshine-IDE.com is hiring contractors to bring Apache Royale to version 1.0

2019-05-03 Thread Dany Dhondt

Hi Piotr,
It’s an amazing offer and I’m sorry if there’s not much response. I am working 
on the doc section and spent some time on SO. I can’t meet the deadline though 
since my time is limited. You asked me to write an article on Royale vs React 
and I would like to do so but again need more time. 
So I hope you’ll get more response to your call. 
Succes
Dany

Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPhone

> Op 3 mei 2019 om 11:46 heeft Carlos Rovira  het 
> volgende geschreven:
> 
> I tweet about it:
> 
> https://twitter.com/ApacheRoyale/status/1124248372569944065
> 
> Hopefully we can get more people to know about this offer
> 
> Share and retweet! :)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 9:33, Piotr Zarzycki ()
> escribió:
> 
>> Too bad that this proposition is not being answered in any way. However
>> there is still time today submit your expectations and help this project
>> grow.
>> 
>> wt., 30 kwi 2019 o 08:24 Justin M. Hill  napisał(a):
>> 
>>> Hi Alex,
>>> 
>>> Thank you very much for providing insight into the proper way to approach
>>> these matters in the Apache way.  I will be mindful of the specific
>> wording
>>> in the future.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hi Dany,
>>> 
>>> It sounds to me like you know a lot about React!
>>> 
>>> Maybe you could start the React part of the comparison document or FAQ
>>> section, and then someone else who knows Royale better could fill in the
>>> comparison pieces.
>>> 
>>> If Royale hopes to have any wider adoption beyond traditional Flex
>>> developers, I personally think it must communicate clearly WHY
>> technically
>>> the development community should care.  This - to me at least - means a
>>> pros/cons list compared to other market incumbents, without being
>> marketing
>>> nonsense.  It should be based in facts about the technical architectures
>> --
>>> exactly as you start to describe in your message.
>>> 
>>> As Alex mentioned, we need these points to be factual and not opinion
>>> based to maintain the Apache way.   And actually, the facts are a lot
>> more
>>> useful than opinions, because otherwise technical conversations degrade
>>> into "I think X way is better", instead of X way requires A instead of B
>>> which is the method Y uses.  Exactly like your DOM rendering discussion.
>>> And that is precisely what it seems to me like you are starting to share
>>> below about things like JQuery not being usable with React.  A lot of
>>> people know JQuery and like it, so that seems to me something in the "+"
>>> column for Royale vs. React.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Regarding command lines and power users / script -- I'm all for that.  I
>>> love UNIX / Linux / Mac Terminal ... However, I also hate forcing new
>> users
>>> who have limited time to learn unrelated things to their immediate task.
>>> Nobody using Mac for the first time starts with Terminal.  They ease
>> their
>>> way into it.  My hope is that we can achieve the easing in with Royale.
>>> Otherwise, I think too much brain power around the world right now is
>> being
>>> spent re-learning this stuff over and over again, when it could be point
>>> and click while still having the knobs to adjust behind the scenes.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> It is a minor personal mission of mine to make it easier for people like
>>> me who like to program, but have very little time to do so, and don't
>> have
>>> time to figure out all the nonsense I don't care about like NPM when I do
>>> have time to program.   I just want to be able to launch an IDE and tweak
>>> the Hello World example to see how to build useful things that I can
>> start
>>> to tailor for my needs.  That is one reason why I'm involved in
>>> Moonshine-IDE.com and it is one of the reasons I care about Royale:  we
>> can
>>> avoid the Javascript flavor of the month syndrome with Royale.   If I
>> later
>>> need to get under the hood and script some things together, I'm glad I
>> have
>>> that option.  But I don't want to start my learning experience with it.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Anyway, back to the topic at hand -- I'd encourage you to submit a bid
>> for
>>> spending some of your professional time on this documentation effort on
>>> React.   Anything you can do to illuminate these differences would be
>> much
>>> appreciated, even if someone else has to fill in the Royale side of the
>>> document.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Thank you,
>>> 
>>> Justin
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> [image: Inactive hide details for dev-digest-help---04/29/2019 10:55:35
>>> PM---dev Digest 30 Apr 2019 03:55:22 - Issue 1978 Topics
>> (m]dev-digest-help---04/29/2019
>>> 10:55:35 PM---dev Digest 30 Apr 2019 03:55:22 - Issue 1978 Topics
>>> (messages 9973 through 9978)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> - Message from Dany Dhondt  on Tue, 30
>>> Apr 2019 05:54:49 +0200 -
>>> *To:*
>>> 
>>>   dev@royale.apache.org
>>> 
>>> *Subject:*
>>> 
>>>   Re: Let's bump Royale version to 1.0 -- submit your bid for assistance
>>>   to the group by Friday May 3
>>> 
>>> Hi Justin,
>>> 
>>> As much as I would like to write an article on Royale vs. co

Re: [JOB] Moonshine-IDE.com is hiring contractors to bring Apache Royale to version 1.0

I tweet about it:

https://twitter.com/ApacheRoyale/status/1124248372569944065

Hopefully we can get more people to know about this offer

Share and retweet! :)





El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 9:33, Piotr Zarzycki ()
escribió:

> Too bad that this proposition is not being answered in any way. However
> there is still time today submit your expectations and help this project
> grow.
>
> wt., 30 kwi 2019 o 08:24 Justin M. Hill  napisał(a):
>
> > Hi Alex,
> >
> > Thank you very much for providing insight into the proper way to approach
> > these matters in the Apache way.  I will be mindful of the specific
> wording
> > in the future.
> >
> >
> > Hi Dany,
> >
> > It sounds to me like you know a lot about React!
> >
> > Maybe you could start the React part of the comparison document or FAQ
> > section, and then someone else who knows Royale better could fill in the
> > comparison pieces.
> >
> > If Royale hopes to have any wider adoption beyond traditional Flex
> > developers, I personally think it must communicate clearly WHY
> technically
> > the development community should care.  This - to me at least - means a
> > pros/cons list compared to other market incumbents, without being
> marketing
> > nonsense.  It should be based in facts about the technical architectures
> --
> > exactly as you start to describe in your message.
> >
> > As Alex mentioned, we need these points to be factual and not opinion
> > based to maintain the Apache way.   And actually, the facts are a lot
> more
> > useful than opinions, because otherwise technical conversations degrade
> > into "I think X way is better", instead of X way requires A instead of B
> > which is the method Y uses.  Exactly like your DOM rendering discussion.
> > And that is precisely what it seems to me like you are starting to share
> > below about things like JQuery not being usable with React.  A lot of
> > people know JQuery and like it, so that seems to me something in the "+"
> > column for Royale vs. React.
> >
> >
> > Regarding command lines and power users / script -- I'm all for that.  I
> > love UNIX / Linux / Mac Terminal ... However, I also hate forcing new
> users
> > who have limited time to learn unrelated things to their immediate task.
> > Nobody using Mac for the first time starts with Terminal.  They ease
> their
> > way into it.  My hope is that we can achieve the easing in with Royale.
> > Otherwise, I think too much brain power around the world right now is
> being
> > spent re-learning this stuff over and over again, when it could be point
> > and click while still having the knobs to adjust behind the scenes.
> >
> >
> > It is a minor personal mission of mine to make it easier for people like
> > me who like to program, but have very little time to do so, and don't
> have
> > time to figure out all the nonsense I don't care about like NPM when I do
> > have time to program.   I just want to be able to launch an IDE and tweak
> > the Hello World example to see how to build useful things that I can
> start
> > to tailor for my needs.  That is one reason why I'm involved in
> > Moonshine-IDE.com and it is one of the reasons I care about Royale:  we
> can
> > avoid the Javascript flavor of the month syndrome with Royale.   If I
> later
> > need to get under the hood and script some things together, I'm glad I
> have
> > that option.  But I don't want to start my learning experience with it.
> >
> >
> > Anyway, back to the topic at hand -- I'd encourage you to submit a bid
> for
> > spending some of your professional time on this documentation effort on
> > React.   Anything you can do to illuminate these differences would be
> much
> > appreciated, even if someone else has to fill in the Royale side of the
> > document.
> >
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Justin
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [image: Inactive hide details for dev-digest-help---04/29/2019 10:55:35
> > PM---dev Digest 30 Apr 2019 03:55:22 - Issue 1978 Topics
> (m]dev-digest-help---04/29/2019
> > 10:55:35 PM---dev Digest 30 Apr 2019 03:55:22 - Issue 1978 Topics
> > (messages 9973 through 9978)
> >
> >
> > - Message from Dany Dhondt  on Tue, 30
> > Apr 2019 05:54:49 +0200 -
> > *To:*
> >
> >dev@royale.apache.org
> >
> > *Subject:*
> >
> >Re: Let's bump Royale version to 1.0 -- submit your bid for assistance
> >to the group by Friday May 3
> >
> > Hi Justin,
> >
> > As much as I would like to write an article on Royale vs. competitors, I
> > can’t do so at this moment because I don’t have enough Royale knowledge
> > yet. But there are things I could point at so that the Royale team can
> > formulate answers.
> > Here are some questions and ideas I have which could be addressed:
> >
> > 1. Royale blog
> > On our site, there is a section called ‘blog’. Shouldn’t we rename that?
> > To me, a blog is something of the past. ‘Examples’ or ‘Code snippets’ or
> > something similar would be better.
> >
> > 2. Faq
> > We definitely need a faq. Common answers to basic questi

Re: Using @extrens ( RE: Example of access external JS using Apache Royale)