BTW, if you do upgrade FB to run on Java 7/8, you may also need to edit
the .ini file and add:
-Djava.util.Arrays.useLegacyMergeSort=true
Otherwise the regular Flex SDK compiler may start throwing errors.
HTH,
-Alex
On 2/7/17, 6:28 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>
>
>On 2/7/17, 6:17 PM, "Justin Mcle
[email protected]
> --
> View this message in context: http://apache-flex-
> development.247.n4.nabble.com/About-legacy-IDEs-Re-AW-
> FALCONJX-Combining-SWF-and-JS-compilers-tp59010p59165.html
> Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
/About-legacy-IDEs-Re-AW-FALCONJX-Combining-SWF-and-JS-compilers-tp59010p59165.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Looks like Piotr's [1] bug report makes FDT an option for FlexJS.
[1] http://bugs.powerflasher.com/jira/browse/FDT-3716
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-development.247.n4.nabble.com/About-legacy-IDEs-Re-AW-FALCONJX-Combining-SWF-and-JS-compilers-tp59010p59122
Hi,
> This may apply to FlexJS as well as Apache Flex
It’s the external scripts made to compile etc FlexJS projects that don't work
on 4.6. The minor Flex SDK issues re the html template and initial code I can
live with.
> Have you tried this? Seemed to work for me.
> http://blogs.adobe.com/
On 2/7/17, 6:17 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>For me re IDEs:
>- FlexJS does work on FlashBuilder 4.6.
This may apply to FlexJS as well as Apache Flex:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/flex-users/201308.mbox/%3cCE315149
.fe43%[email protected]%3e
>- FlashBuilder 4.7 doesn’t work
Hi,
For me re IDEs:
- FlexJS does work on FlashBuilder 4.6.
- FlashBuilder 4.7 doesn’t work on recent version of OSX for many people.
- Moonshine while off to a good start is missing a few features like code
completion, git integration and maven support.
- IntelliJ is difficult to set up and may
That sounds reasonable to me if you think it makes maintenance easier.
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-development.247.n4.nabble.com/About-legacy-IDEs-Re-AW-FALCONJX-Combining-SWF-and-JS-compilers-tp59010p59051.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list
s FB, I'll make the switch. In the meantime, my personal focus
is to get as much done as possible with the tools that work for me.
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-development.247.n4.nabble.com/About-legacy-IDEs-Re-AW-FALCONJX-Combining-
t work for me.
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-development.247.n4.nabble.com/About-legacy-IDEs-Re-AW-FALCONJX-Combining-SWF-and-JS-compilers-tp59010p59047.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
how much
work it will be without committing to doing it...
Let's assume we try to do this (packing a library-js.swf alongside
library.swf in a single SWF). The -compiler.targets feature I'm finishing
up essentially means that one launch of MXMLJSC or COMPJSC actually runs
m
On 2/3/17, 9:56 AM, "[email protected] on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
wrote:
>Hi Alex and Chris,
>
>I don't say we should *drop* support, but we should not think or plan
>things based on if that will work on a legacy IDE.
>Or in other words. We should not see anymore reference to FB when tal
I guess what we are proposing doesn’t mean: Drop Legacy IDEs, but just force
people who need the legacy stuff to enable the legacy layer with a simple
switch.
I mentioned the descriptor thing often enough, but for example having
self-contained SWCs definitely makes it easier for people with ne
Hi Alex and Chris,
I don't say we should *drop* support, but we should not think or plan
things based on if that will work on a legacy IDE.
Or in other words. We should not see anymore reference to FB when talking
about FlexJS, since no body cares about it.
That's all.
About Trevor's proposal, fo
I don't claim to know the right answer so other folks should certainly
give their thoughts. IMO, if you want to encourage migration, you change
as few things as possible.
We don't spend a ton of time on supporting the old IDEs. Not mucking with
the contents of the SWCs saves me time to work on o
Hi Carlos,
I see it the same way as you ☺
But I wouldn’t drop support for FB, the thing I was proposing, was to make the
default FlexJS SDK targeted for non-legacy IDEs and tools and to have a
“legacy-ide” profile (in Maven terms) in which someone requiring it could
enable a patch-layer that s
Hi,
(coming from the other thread and removing test and renaming thread)
in all this conversation I have the sense that Alex is always looking to be
compliant with old IDEs (I'm specially talking about FB) and don't
understand the reason behind. I think this is making us far to get a
solution for
On 2/2/17, 10:59 AM, "Christofer Dutz" wrote:
>Hi Alex,
>
>I was going to suggest something down the path of: creating the primary
>artifact which contains library.swf and library-is.swf. We could use
>these in Ant, Maven and newer IDEs and additionally continue to produce a
>separate js-swc (a
f: Re: [FALCONJX] Combining SWF and JS compilers (was Re: AW:
[FalconJX][FlexJS] COMPJSC and Build order)
I'm going to try to respond to both you and Carlos.
IMO, there are "Application Developers" (AppDevs) and "Component/Framework
Developers" (CompDevs). Today, in FlexJS
at's not
>what I
>want to do with my time). The dual compile will effectively show you
>what is common, and I hope we can add documentation to mark what is
>common.
>
>I think there are two pieces here:
>-Will it be to painful to require third parti
I think there are two pieces here:
-Will it be to painful to require third parties to ship two SWCs per
library?
-Can we make it so that if you specify XXX.SWC on the library path, you
don't also have to specify XXXJS.SWC in the config?
I think we can make the comp
2017-02-02 17:38 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
>
>
> I have not worked with ANEs, but AIUI, there is one API definition and
> multiple platform object codes. For FlexJS SWCs there are different API
> definitions per platform.
Diferent APIs? mmm I thought that our objective was to have one API that
enca
o require third parties to ship two SWCs per
library?
-Can we make it so that if you specify XXX.SWC on the library path, you
don't also have to specify XXXJS.SWC in the config?
I think we can make the compilers make some assumptions so that if there
are two SWCs per library the consumer only ha
I think self contain is better too. For example Adobe AIR does the same
with Multiplatform ANEs. If the ANE is implemented for iOS, Android, and
more,...all goes in the same .ane and I think that's really good, since the
library is in fact Multiplatform and ready to use for anyone in anyplace :)
2
Would it be somehow possible to make the swcs self-contained?
Right now they contain catalog.xml and library.swf … couldn’t this contain
something like a “catalog-js.xml” and a “library-js.swf” … this way we could
just add a dependency to a SWC and the compiler could internally grab what he
nee
So there would be two different lib folders? One for swf compilation and
another for js compilation? Maybe a third lib folder for “dual” compilation?
Here’s a thought: Would it be possible to create a “dual” swc which would
contain the definitions for both JS and SWF? And have falcon understand
I personally don’t care that much about Flash Builder. I’m moving more and more
over to VS Code. AIUI, VS Code picks up the compiler settings, so if there’s
both a js and swf library path, I’m thinking that it should work. Josh could
give a more definitive answer on that.
Our JS projects don’t
Hi Alex,
to figure about time schedules, it seems you have this already working on
your machine and need some latest touches and refienments right?
So in case I'll separate basic clases and tags, I think it would be better
to do after your change right?
Other way could be to introduce the tags in
On 2/1/17, 1:41 PM, "Harbs" wrote:
>One question: How do you envision swc for third party libraries if both
>JS and SWF swcs are being used?
>
>Is this strictly an SDK thing or would there be some mechanism for having
>split swcs for libs as well?
I think third-parties will also have to distri
On 2/1/17, 1:33 PM, "Harbs" wrote:
>This! I like!
>
>Theoretically it should make it possible to get correct code completion
>in both COMPILE::SWF and COMPILE::JS blocks. That would be a huge help!
Hmm. Not so sure about that. For one FB project, there is only one set
of SWCs and I don't kno
g without break Maven build I
>> think we should do this, but not in 0.8.0. We have now enough content to
>> release.
>>
>> Piotr
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Apache Flex PMC
>> [email protected]
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> ht
This! I like!
Theoretically it should make it possible to get correct code completion in both
COMPILE::SWF and COMPILE::JS blocks. That would be a huge help!
> On Feb 1, 2017, at 6:22 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
> And, FWIW, AUTO when used for -define=COMPILE::SWF,AUTO and
> -define=COMPILE::JS,AU
>Apache Flex PMC
>[email protected]
>--
>View this message in context:
>http://apache-flex-development.247.n4.nabble.com/FALCONJX-Combining-SW
>F-and-JS-compilers-was-Re-AW-FalconJX-FlexJS-COMPJSC-and-Build-order-tp556
>24p58914.html
>Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
.n4.nabble.com/FALCONJX-Combining-SWF-and-JS-compilers-was-Re-AW-FalconJX-FlexJS-COMPJSC-and-Build-order-tp55624p58914.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi Carlos,
In that case they belong into separate modules. Besides this being work, what
other reason would there be to keep them in the same module?
Producing two primary artifacts for one module is actually not discussable if
we want to keep Maven support working cleanly without hacks.
Chris
Hi Chris
2017-02-01 11:34 GMT+01:00 Christofer Dutz :
> Hi guys,
>
> I’d love to see basic go away. I already excluded it from the maven
> distribution to avoid problems in IntelliJ.
>
>
But, if my proposal of separating flexjs components from basic html tags
are ok, we'll end with two. Right now
Hi guys,
I’d love to see basic go away. I already excluded it from the maven
distribution to avoid problems in IntelliJ.
Didn’t see that “question 3” … what would these two swcs be? I am asking
because Maven has the concept of one primary artifact per module. We are
currently producing one mai
HI Alex,
2017-01-31 18:41 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
> OK, I have something working. It is in the "dual" branch I just pushed.
>
great :)
> But there is a catch: MXMLJSC requires Java 7 or greater and Flash
> Builder is packaged with Java 6. So, in order to use this capability from
> FB, you w
CONJX] Combining SWF and JS compilers (was Re: AW:
[FalconJX][FlexJS] COMPJSC and Build order)
On 1/31/17, 12:43 PM, "Christofer Dutz" wrote:
>Would it be a valid compromise to have two Cordova outputs … one that
>dumps the config.xml and one that also runs Cordova?
>I could live
On 1/31/17, 12:43 PM, "Christofer Dutz" wrote:
>Would it be a valid compromise to have two Cordova outputs … one that
>dumps the config.xml and one that also runs Cordova?
>I could live with that. Then I could continue to run Cordova in the
>packaging phase.
Is there already a config.xml being
Would it be a valid compromise to have two Cordova outputs … one that dumps the
config.xml and one that also runs Cordova?
I could live with that. Then I could continue to run Cordova in the packaging
phase.
Chris
Am 31.01.17, 21:23 schrieb "Alex Harui" :
On 1/31/17, 11:51 AM, "C
On 1/31/17, 11:51 AM, "Christofer Dutz" wrote:
>So if I understand you correctly, FlexJS would be outputting an
>“apk”-file because it invokes Cordova internally?
>
>I would vote -1 on that.
>
>The problem here is that we are tightly coupling FlexJS and Cordova. We
>then have one execution, tha
So if I understand you correctly, FlexJS would be outputting an “apk”-file
because it invokes Cordova internally?
I would vote -1 on that.
The problem here is that we are tightly coupling FlexJS and Cordova. We then
have one execution, that does generation, compilation and packaging (Maven
te
On 1/31/17, 10:16 AM, "Christofer Dutz" wrote:
>Hi Alex,
>
>I’ll have a look at the changes and eventually try to prepare the maven
>plugin for these changes.
In theory, MXMLJSC is backwards compatible. I will try to remember to
make sure of that before merging to develop.
Longer term, I lea
le it told me where I was still using Flash APIs. This was
a main motivator for combining the compilers. Currently the code in
HTML.swc wraps Sprites for the SWF code which I think is now unnecessary.
So that's question #2: Can I start replacing HTML with Basic?
Right now in t
can't upgrade.
Using -compiler.targets, I was able to go back to using the Basic.swc and
on the JS compile it told me where I was still using Flash APIs. This was
a main motivator for combining the compilers. Currently the code in
HTML.swc wraps Sprites for the SWF code which I think is no
>>would introduce a new configuration parameter like -output-type
>or
>>>-targets or something like that. I supposed it could be a list
>of
>>>compiler jars to run. But -js-output-type doesn't currently go
>>through
>>
to take all of that on right
>now, but
>>we might want to consider that as well.
>>
>>-Alex
>>
>>On 10/7/16, 12:14 AM, "Christofer Dutz"
>wrote:
>>
>>>I would like to prop
or JSC, NODE, and FLEXJS. That parameter just sets
>up a
>>few configuration changes within the output classes.
>>
>>I'm pretty sure Schmalle imagined a true plug-in architecture for the
>>emitters as well. Not sure we want to take all of that on right
ht want to consider that as well.
>
>-Alex
>
>On 10/7/16, 12:14 AM, "Christofer Dutz" wrote:
>
>>I would like to propose a different approach:
>>
>>
>>Unless these approaches led to a dead end and there is
dead end and there is no solution down
>>that path, I would rather suggest to refactor the compiler to allow
>>dynamic adding of alternate compilers. Currently the supported compilers
>>are limited by the JsOutputType enum. If we however used something like
>>the Java service th
t; wrote:
>I would like to propose a different approach:
>
>
>Unless these approaches led to a dead end and there is no solution down
>that path, I would rather suggest to refactor the compiler to allow
>dynamic adding of alternate compilers. Currently the supported compilers
&
I would like to propose a different approach:
Unless these approaches led to a dead end and there is no solution down that
path, I would rather suggest to refactor the compiler to allow dynamic adding
of alternate compilers. Currently the supported compilers are limited by the
JsOutputType
>> >
>> > Von: Josh Tynjala
>> > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 6. Oktober 2016 17:13:49
>> > An: [email protected]
>> > Betreff: Re: [FALCONJX] Combining SWF and JS compilers (was Re: AW:
>> > [FalconJX][Fl
to some sort of attic. What do you think?
> >
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > Von: Josh Tynjala
> > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 6. Oktober 2016 17:13:49
> > An: [email protected]
> > Betreff: Re: [FALCONJX] Combining SWF and JS
ink it would be better to move
> stuf like that to some sort of attic. What do you think?
>
>
> Chris
>
>
> Von: Josh Tynjala
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 6. Oktober 2016 17:13:49
> An: [email protected]
> Betreff: Re: [FALCONJX] Combining
SWF and JS compilers (was Re: AW:
[FalconJX][FlexJS] COMPJSC and Build order)
JSC is meant to be purely an ActionScript to JavaScript transpiler without
any frameworks. By default, it doesn't export an HTML file, but it will
optionally support custom HTML templates in 0.8.0. It is exposed th
And I think GOOG was another flavor intended to leverage more of GCL but
is not currently supported.
So I think the only active ones are JSC, NODE, FLEXJS (which is the
default).
We might retire FLEXJS_DUAL depending on how we decide to combine the
compilers.
-Alex
On 10/6/16, 8:13 AM, "
SC
> NODE
>
> And I guess I only used no value and FLEXJS
>
>
> Chris
>
>
> Von: Alex Harui
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 6. Oktober 2016 07:45:48
> An: [email protected]
> Betreff: [FALCONJX] Combining SWF and JS compilers (was Re: AW:
treff: [FALCONJX] Combining SWF and JS compilers (was Re: AW:
[FalconJX][FlexJS] COMPJSC and Build order)
Fred Thomas did some work in this area about a year ago. In the
flex-oem-compiler module that FB (and maybe other IDEs) use to talk to the
compiler, he added a FLEXJS_DUAL -js-output-type. Not
tions available to both compilers which might be a bit strange. Or
maybe we can convince the compilers to not complain about unknown config
parameters.
We'd have to decide on how to reset the library-path for each compile.
The JS compile might use different SWCs than the SWF compile.
We
compiler.strict-xml
source-map
There are a couple of “not sure”s on the page as well.
On May 18, 2016, at 7:38 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>
> On 5/18/16, 12:58 AM, "Harbs" wrote:
>
>> Thanks for all this info. I updated the wiki.[1]
>>
>> There are some holes on the page, so if anyone could pr
On 5/18/16, 12:58 AM, "Harbs" wrote:
>Thanks for all this info. I updated the wiki.[1]
>
>There are some holes on the page, so if anyone could proof-read it and
>add pertinent info, that would be helpful.
Thanks for doing this. Which holes are you referring to?
-Alex
Thanks for all this info. I updated the wiki.[1]
There are some holes on the page, so if anyone could proof-read it and add
pertinent info, that would be helpful.
[1]https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLEX/Getting+Started+with+the+Falcon+and+FalconJX+Compilers
On May 10, 2016, at 6:09
-external-externs is kind of like -external-library-path for externs.
Basically, I way to specify some types that are needed at compile time
without including them in the final output.
- Josh
On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 11:41 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>
> On 5/9/16, 12:44 PM, "Harbs" wrote:
>
> >This
On 5/10/16, 1:39 AM, "Harbs" wrote:
>To make sure I understand:
>
>ExternC generates .as files which are then compiled to swcs by compc?
>
>What’s the purpose of running ExternC on js and outputting js? Wouldn’t
>that just output the original files?
ExternC parses most JS, including some JS no
To make sure I understand:
ExternC generates .as files which are then compiled to swcs by compc?
What’s the purpose of running ExternC on js and outputting js? Wouldn’t that
just output the original files?
On May 10, 2016, at 9:41 AM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>
> On 5/9/16, 12:44 PM, "Harbs" wr
On 5/9/16, 12:44 PM, "Harbs" wrote:
>This would probably be useful.
>
>On May 9, 2016, at 7:59 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>> ExternC has its own config. If you need it I can try to generate it.
>
Looks like the options are:
-js-root Tells ExternC to generate JS instead of AS and place it in t
This would probably be useful.
On May 9, 2016, at 7:59 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
> ExternC has its own config. If you need it I can try to generate it.
BTW, it would be great to find a volunteer to update the files like:
compiler/src/main/resources/org/apache/flex/compiler/messages_en.properties
Then the --help system would work from the command line. And the
printHelp and friends from MXMLC.java and friends needs to be replicated
in MXMLJSC so
Awesome! This is exactly what I was looking for.
I’ll copy this info to the wiki.
On May 9, 2016, at 7:59 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
> Falcon (SWF Compiler) should support all MXMLC inputs from the regular
> Flex SDK except the "keep-generated-actionscript" option which I think it
> just ignores (Fa
Falcon (SWF Compiler) should support all MXMLC inputs from the regular
Flex SDK except the "keep-generated-actionscript" option which I think it
just ignores (Falcon does not generate ActionScript from MXML, it goes
straight from MXML to ABC). I think there are some embedded font options
that aren
This is good.
What about acceptable arguments?
Off the top of my head, there’s
1. remove circulars (which I never totally understood)
2. strict XML
3. debug options
4. keep-asdoc (how well does this work?)
5. flexlib
etc.
Without clear documentation of all this stuff, it feels very overwhelming.
This is good.
What about acceptable arguments?
Off the top of my head, there’s
1. remove circulars (which I never totally understood)
2. strict XML
3. debug options
4. keep-asdoc (how well does this work?)
5. flexlib
etc.
Without clear documentation of all this stuff, it feels very overwhelming.
On 5/8/16, 5:33 AM, "Harbs" wrote:
>I’m trying to set up some development environments and I realized there’s
>lots of pieces and I’m not sure how everything fits together.
>
>FalconJX currently generates the following scripts and executables:
>
>Scripts:
>Asjsc - compiles AS app to JS with JS.
some idea about some of these, but I’m sure I don’t have the full
picture.
I think we need this all documented. This page seems like a good place.[1]
Harbs
[1]https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLEX/Getting+Started+with+the+Falcon+and+FalconJX+Compilers
ch I also think should be a good thing)
>
>Chris
>
>-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
>Von: Alex Harui [mailto:[email protected]]
>Gesendet: Montag, 30. Dezember 2013 16:42
>An: [email protected]
>Betreff: Re: Compilers
>
>Hi Chris,
>
>Can you tell us which S
ezember 2013 16:42
An: [email protected]
Betreff: Re: Compilers
Hi Chris,
Can you tell us which SDK version introduces this slowdown? I don't think it
is the compiler code per-se. I don't see any changes to the modules folder
that would explain it. It could be that the experimenta
Hi Chris,
Can you tell us which SDK version introduces this slowdown? I don't think
it is the compiler code per-se. I don't see any changes to the modules
folder that would explain it. It could be that the experimental and other
new SWCs are being parsed for some reason.
Falcon is still not re
Hi,
After updating to the latest Flex SDKs I am experiencing a dramatic increase in
compile time when compiling my Skin modules (With the normal swc and swfs there
is no noticeable change). While compiling the skin Module (Compilation Entry
Point is a CSS file) the compile time jumped up from a
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-33453?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Justin Mclean resolved FLEX-33453.
--
Resolution: Fixed
> Compilers have wrong copyright y
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-33453?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Justin Mclean reassigned FLEX-33453:
Assignee: Justin Mclean
> Compilers have wrong copyright y
Justin Mclean created FLEX-33453:
Summary: Compilers have wrong copyright year
Key: FLEX-33453
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-33453
Project: Apache Flex
Issue Type: Bug
83 matches
Mail list logo
