You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@flex.apache.org by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> on 2015/12/21 09:26:31 UTC
[FalconJX] Is it time to delete the FalconJS code?
Hi,
It has been a long time since I've looked at the FalconJS code that was
donated by Adobe. The FalconJX code seems to be working fine. The
FalconJS code seems to be confusing some people who are trying to help
find bugs in FalconJX, so I think it might be time to just delete the
whole FalconJS folder. We can always go back and get it if we need to.
Thoughts?
-Alex
Re: [FalconJX] Is it time to delete the FalconJS code?
Posted by Carlos Rovira <ca...@codeoscopic.com>.
+1
that kind of code makes people confused (so it did for me in the past). So
better delete it and if someone needs he/she can download from the history
2015-12-21 10:22 GMT+01:00 Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>:
> +1
>
> I think I lost track how often, during my maven-deploy efforts I processed
> that stuff and was a little frustrated after finding out it's actually not
> used.
> I would generally suggest to move dead and experimental code to some place
> you don't confuse it with real parts of Falcon or FlexJS (especialy I would
> suggest to move the As2Js (or what it was called) to a separate branch.
>
> At least this is one of the things that give me a really bad feeling
> whenever I work on these projects.
>
> Chris
>
> ________________________________________
> Von: Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>
> Gesendet: Montag, 21. Dezember 2015 09:26
> An: dev@flex.apache.org
> Betreff: [FalconJX] Is it time to delete the FalconJS code?
>
> Hi,
>
> It has been a long time since I've looked at the FalconJS code that was
> donated by Adobe. The FalconJX code seems to be working fine. The
> FalconJS code seems to be confusing some people who are trying to help
> find bugs in FalconJX, so I think it might be time to just delete the
> whole FalconJS folder. We can always go back and get it if we need to.
>
> Thoughts?
> -Alex
>
>
--
Carlos Rovira
Director General
M: +34 607 22 60 05
http://www.codeoscopic.com
http://www.avant2.es
Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario y puede contener
información privilegiada o confidencial. Si ha recibido este mensaje por
error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y
proceda a su destrucción.
De la vigente Ley Orgánica de Protección de Datos (15/1999), le comunicamos
que sus datos forman parte de un fichero cuyo responsable es CODEOSCOPIC
S.A. La finalidad de dicho tratamiento es facilitar la prestación del
servicio o información solicitados, teniendo usted derecho de acceso,
rectificación, cancelación y oposición de sus datos dirigiéndose a nuestras
oficinas c/ Paseo de la Habana 9-11, 28036, Madrid con la documentación
necesaria.
AW: [FalconJX] Is it time to delete the FalconJS code?
Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.
+1
I think I lost track how often, during my maven-deploy efforts I processed that stuff and was a little frustrated after finding out it's actually not used.
I would generally suggest to move dead and experimental code to some place you don't confuse it with real parts of Falcon or FlexJS (especialy I would suggest to move the As2Js (or what it was called) to a separate branch.
At least this is one of the things that give me a really bad feeling whenever I work on these projects.
Chris
________________________________________
Von: Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>
Gesendet: Montag, 21. Dezember 2015 09:26
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: [FalconJX] Is it time to delete the FalconJS code?
Hi,
It has been a long time since I've looked at the FalconJS code that was
donated by Adobe. The FalconJX code seems to be working fine. The
FalconJS code seems to be confusing some people who are trying to help
find bugs in FalconJX, so I think it might be time to just delete the
whole FalconJS folder. We can always go back and get it if we need to.
Thoughts?
-Alex
Re: [FalconJX] Is it time to delete the FalconJS code?
Posted by Harbs <ha...@gmail.com>.
I would suggest putting it in a branch called falconjs_archive (or something like that to make it clear that it’s archived code) and removing it from develop branch. That way if there’s ever any reason to use code from there, it should be easy to pull it in.
On Dec 21, 2015, at 10:26 AM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It has been a long time since I've looked at the FalconJS code that was
> donated by Adobe. The FalconJX code seems to be working fine. The
> FalconJS code seems to be confusing some people who are trying to help
> find bugs in FalconJX, so I think it might be time to just delete the
> whole FalconJS folder. We can always go back and get it if we need to.
>
> Thoughts?
> -Alex
>
Re: [FalconJX] Is it time to delete the FalconJS code?
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
I will probably just tag the repo unless someone speaks up really wanting
a branch.
-Alex
On 1/11/16, 1:45 PM, "Andy Dufilie" <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Setting a tag seems like the best way.
>
>git tag mytagname
>git push origin mytagname
>
>then do whatever you want.
>
>On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 4:10 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala
><bi...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Maybe this will work (based on this stackoverflow answer [1])
>>
>> 1. Move the code to its own branch.
>>
>> 2. Then tag the branch:
>> git tag archive/<branchname> <branchname>
>>
>> 3. Then delete the branch
>> git branch -d <branchname>
>>
>> To restore the branch:
>>
>> git checkout -b <branchname> archive/<branchname>
>>
>>
>>http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1307114/how-can-i-archive-git-branches
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Michael Schmalle <
>> teotigraphixllc@gmail.com
>> > wrote:
>>
>> > Can't you just create a tag like "Last know existence of FalconJS"
>>commit
>> > then delete. Or were other people saying they still wanted to code
>> > somewhere, seems to me that was some of the conversation.
>> >
>> > Mike
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 4:02 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Does anybody have an actual set of steps to create some sort of
>> archival
>> > > branch or can I just delete this project?
>> > >
>> > > -Alex
>> > >
>> > > On 12/21/15, 7:50 AM, "Michael Schmalle" <te...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > >Well garbage is relative. I didn't mean it in a derogatory way,
>>only
>> > that
>> > > >the original authors were the ones that could understand it.
>> > > >
>> > > >As far as FlaconJX, I wrote that as a prototype based off of my
>>prior
>> > > >experience with AST traversing and the visitor pattern. That was
>> almost
>> > 3
>> > > >years ago now so as far as it actually getting refactored on an
>> > > >application
>> > > >level with compilation unit passes, it never happened! :)
>> > > >
>> > > >When iw rote the front and backend I was more using the Flex
>>compiler
>> > as a
>> > > >template, and was slowing digesting how the multithreaded
>>compilation
>> > > >worked in Falcon.
>> > > >
>> > > >It that compiler was a full time/part time paid job for myself I
>>could
>> > > >easily put time into actually optimizing and documenting how the
>> > > >compiler(Falcon) end actually runs. But that is not the case so we
>> have
>> > to
>> > > >guess right now what actually could be changed.
>> > > >
>> > > >Besides, my solution was just one and there may be other ways that
>>the
>> > > >compiler could transpile as to js way faster but it's what I knew
>>at
>> the
>> > > >time and had already done it in a few other projects.
>> > > >
>> > > >Mike
>> > > >
>> > > >On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>
>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> @Harbs,
>> > > >>
>> > > >> I don't know enough about Git and branching to know if this is
>>the
>> > right
>> > > >> way to "archive" stuff before deleting, but I would think that
>> branch
>> > > >> would need special handling after it is created because any
>>attempt
>> to
>> > > >> merge with that branch might result in the deletion of that code.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> @Mark & Mike,
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Where would you create such an archive folder such that it
>>doesn't
>> > show
>> > > >>up
>> > > >> when grep-ing the code? IMO, that's the goal: on GitHub and
>> locally,
>> > I
>> > > >> don't want these files to be found by search tools.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> @Mike,
>> > > >>
>> > > >> I would caution against calling that code base "garbage". It
>>worked
>> > > >>well
>> > > >> enough to produce the early prototypes, and you never know when
>>we
>> > might
>> > > >> want to seek the advice and participation of its author. Yeah,
>>some
>> > > >>parts
>> > > >> of it were really hard to learn, but it did do things that I had
>>to
>> go
>> > > >>fix
>> > > >> again in FalconJX, and I think FalconJX still runs several of the
>> > phases
>> > > >> of the CompilationUnit code that we may need to stop doing some
>>day
>> > for
>> > > >> performance reasons and go through another round of bug fixing
>>when
>> we
>> > > >>do,
>> > > >> because semantic errors seem to be caught during reduction.
>> FalconJS
>> > > >>was
>> > > >> leveraging the CompilationUnit phases.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> -Alex
>> > > >>
>> > > >> On 12/21/15, 3:27 AM, "Michael Schmalle"
>><teotigraphixllc@gmail.com
>> >
>> > > >> wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >> >Yup, I agree, it doesn't really need to be deleted but it needs
>>to
>> be
>> > > >>so
>> > > >> >far away from FalconJX that a common dev wouldn't mistake it for
>> > > >>anything
>> > > >> >other than archived history.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >The code is garbage, another reason why FalconJX even exists, I
>> hated
>> > > >>that
>> > > >> >code with a passion. :)
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >Mike
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 6:03 AM, Kessler CTR Mark J <
>> > > >> >mark.kessler.ctr@usmc.mil> wrote:
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >> Might as well make an archive folder that's generic and we can
>> put
>> > > >> >> anything else we want to keep but don't want in the main
>>source
>> > > >>areas.
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >> -Mark
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
Re: [FalconJX] Is it time to delete the FalconJS code?
Posted by Andy Dufilie <an...@gmail.com>.
Setting a tag seems like the best way.
git tag mytagname
git push origin mytagname
then do whatever you want.
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 4:10 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala <bi...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Maybe this will work (based on this stackoverflow answer [1])
>
> 1. Move the code to its own branch.
>
> 2. Then tag the branch:
> git tag archive/<branchname> <branchname>
>
> 3. Then delete the branch
> git branch -d <branchname>
>
> To restore the branch:
>
> git checkout -b <branchname> archive/<branchname>
>
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1307114/how-can-i-archive-git-branches
>
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Michael Schmalle <
> teotigraphixllc@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
> > Can't you just create a tag like "Last know existence of FalconJS" commit
> > then delete. Or were other people saying they still wanted to code
> > somewhere, seems to me that was some of the conversation.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 4:02 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Does anybody have an actual set of steps to create some sort of
> archival
> > > branch or can I just delete this project?
> > >
> > > -Alex
> > >
> > > On 12/21/15, 7:50 AM, "Michael Schmalle" <te...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >Well garbage is relative. I didn't mean it in a derogatory way, only
> > that
> > > >the original authors were the ones that could understand it.
> > > >
> > > >As far as FlaconJX, I wrote that as a prototype based off of my prior
> > > >experience with AST traversing and the visitor pattern. That was
> almost
> > 3
> > > >years ago now so as far as it actually getting refactored on an
> > > >application
> > > >level with compilation unit passes, it never happened! :)
> > > >
> > > >When iw rote the front and backend I was more using the Flex compiler
> > as a
> > > >template, and was slowing digesting how the multithreaded compilation
> > > >worked in Falcon.
> > > >
> > > >It that compiler was a full time/part time paid job for myself I could
> > > >easily put time into actually optimizing and documenting how the
> > > >compiler(Falcon) end actually runs. But that is not the case so we
> have
> > to
> > > >guess right now what actually could be changed.
> > > >
> > > >Besides, my solution was just one and there may be other ways that the
> > > >compiler could transpile as to js way faster but it's what I knew at
> the
> > > >time and had already done it in a few other projects.
> > > >
> > > >Mike
> > > >
> > > >On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> @Harbs,
> > > >>
> > > >> I don't know enough about Git and branching to know if this is the
> > right
> > > >> way to "archive" stuff before deleting, but I would think that
> branch
> > > >> would need special handling after it is created because any attempt
> to
> > > >> merge with that branch might result in the deletion of that code.
> > > >>
> > > >> @Mark & Mike,
> > > >>
> > > >> Where would you create such an archive folder such that it doesn't
> > show
> > > >>up
> > > >> when grep-ing the code? IMO, that's the goal: on GitHub and
> locally,
> > I
> > > >> don't want these files to be found by search tools.
> > > >>
> > > >> @Mike,
> > > >>
> > > >> I would caution against calling that code base "garbage". It worked
> > > >>well
> > > >> enough to produce the early prototypes, and you never know when we
> > might
> > > >> want to seek the advice and participation of its author. Yeah, some
> > > >>parts
> > > >> of it were really hard to learn, but it did do things that I had to
> go
> > > >>fix
> > > >> again in FalconJX, and I think FalconJX still runs several of the
> > phases
> > > >> of the CompilationUnit code that we may need to stop doing some day
> > for
> > > >> performance reasons and go through another round of bug fixing when
> we
> > > >>do,
> > > >> because semantic errors seem to be caught during reduction.
> FalconJS
> > > >>was
> > > >> leveraging the CompilationUnit phases.
> > > >>
> > > >> -Alex
> > > >>
> > > >> On 12/21/15, 3:27 AM, "Michael Schmalle" <teotigraphixllc@gmail.com
> >
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> >Yup, I agree, it doesn't really need to be deleted but it needs to
> be
> > > >>so
> > > >> >far away from FalconJX that a common dev wouldn't mistake it for
> > > >>anything
> > > >> >other than archived history.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >The code is garbage, another reason why FalconJX even exists, I
> hated
> > > >>that
> > > >> >code with a passion. :)
> > > >> >
> > > >> >Mike
> > > >> >
> > > >> >On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 6:03 AM, Kessler CTR Mark J <
> > > >> >mark.kessler.ctr@usmc.mil> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> >> Might as well make an archive folder that's generic and we can
> put
> > > >> >> anything else we want to keep but don't want in the main source
> > > >>areas.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> -Mark
> > > >> >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [FalconJX] Is it time to delete the FalconJS code?
Posted by OmPrakash Muppirala <bi...@gmail.com>.
Maybe this will work (based on this stackoverflow answer [1])
1. Move the code to its own branch.
2. Then tag the branch:
git tag archive/<branchname> <branchname>
3. Then delete the branch
git branch -d <branchname>
To restore the branch:
git checkout -b <branchname> archive/<branchname>
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1307114/how-can-i-archive-git-branches
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Michael Schmalle <teotigraphixllc@gmail.com
> wrote:
> Can't you just create a tag like "Last know existence of FalconJS" commit
> then delete. Or were other people saying they still wanted to code
> somewhere, seems to me that was some of the conversation.
>
> Mike
>
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 4:02 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
> > Does anybody have an actual set of steps to create some sort of archival
> > branch or can I just delete this project?
> >
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 12/21/15, 7:50 AM, "Michael Schmalle" <te...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Well garbage is relative. I didn't mean it in a derogatory way, only
> that
> > >the original authors were the ones that could understand it.
> > >
> > >As far as FlaconJX, I wrote that as a prototype based off of my prior
> > >experience with AST traversing and the visitor pattern. That was almost
> 3
> > >years ago now so as far as it actually getting refactored on an
> > >application
> > >level with compilation unit passes, it never happened! :)
> > >
> > >When iw rote the front and backend I was more using the Flex compiler
> as a
> > >template, and was slowing digesting how the multithreaded compilation
> > >worked in Falcon.
> > >
> > >It that compiler was a full time/part time paid job for myself I could
> > >easily put time into actually optimizing and documenting how the
> > >compiler(Falcon) end actually runs. But that is not the case so we have
> to
> > >guess right now what actually could be changed.
> > >
> > >Besides, my solution was just one and there may be other ways that the
> > >compiler could transpile as to js way faster but it's what I knew at the
> > >time and had already done it in a few other projects.
> > >
> > >Mike
> > >
> > >On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> @Harbs,
> > >>
> > >> I don't know enough about Git and branching to know if this is the
> right
> > >> way to "archive" stuff before deleting, but I would think that branch
> > >> would need special handling after it is created because any attempt to
> > >> merge with that branch might result in the deletion of that code.
> > >>
> > >> @Mark & Mike,
> > >>
> > >> Where would you create such an archive folder such that it doesn't
> show
> > >>up
> > >> when grep-ing the code? IMO, that's the goal: on GitHub and locally,
> I
> > >> don't want these files to be found by search tools.
> > >>
> > >> @Mike,
> > >>
> > >> I would caution against calling that code base "garbage". It worked
> > >>well
> > >> enough to produce the early prototypes, and you never know when we
> might
> > >> want to seek the advice and participation of its author. Yeah, some
> > >>parts
> > >> of it were really hard to learn, but it did do things that I had to go
> > >>fix
> > >> again in FalconJX, and I think FalconJX still runs several of the
> phases
> > >> of the CompilationUnit code that we may need to stop doing some day
> for
> > >> performance reasons and go through another round of bug fixing when we
> > >>do,
> > >> because semantic errors seem to be caught during reduction. FalconJS
> > >>was
> > >> leveraging the CompilationUnit phases.
> > >>
> > >> -Alex
> > >>
> > >> On 12/21/15, 3:27 AM, "Michael Schmalle" <te...@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >Yup, I agree, it doesn't really need to be deleted but it needs to be
> > >>so
> > >> >far away from FalconJX that a common dev wouldn't mistake it for
> > >>anything
> > >> >other than archived history.
> > >> >
> > >> >The code is garbage, another reason why FalconJX even exists, I hated
> > >>that
> > >> >code with a passion. :)
> > >> >
> > >> >Mike
> > >> >
> > >> >On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 6:03 AM, Kessler CTR Mark J <
> > >> >mark.kessler.ctr@usmc.mil> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> Might as well make an archive folder that's generic and we can put
> > >> >> anything else we want to keep but don't want in the main source
> > >>areas.
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> -Mark
> > >> >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> >
>
Re: [FalconJX] Is it time to delete the FalconJS code?
Posted by Michael Schmalle <te...@gmail.com>.
Can't you just create a tag like "Last know existence of FalconJS" commit
then delete. Or were other people saying they still wanted to code
somewhere, seems to me that was some of the conversation.
Mike
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 4:02 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
> Does anybody have an actual set of steps to create some sort of archival
> branch or can I just delete this project?
>
> -Alex
>
> On 12/21/15, 7:50 AM, "Michael Schmalle" <te...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Well garbage is relative. I didn't mean it in a derogatory way, only that
> >the original authors were the ones that could understand it.
> >
> >As far as FlaconJX, I wrote that as a prototype based off of my prior
> >experience with AST traversing and the visitor pattern. That was almost 3
> >years ago now so as far as it actually getting refactored on an
> >application
> >level with compilation unit passes, it never happened! :)
> >
> >When iw rote the front and backend I was more using the Flex compiler as a
> >template, and was slowing digesting how the multithreaded compilation
> >worked in Falcon.
> >
> >It that compiler was a full time/part time paid job for myself I could
> >easily put time into actually optimizing and documenting how the
> >compiler(Falcon) end actually runs. But that is not the case so we have to
> >guess right now what actually could be changed.
> >
> >Besides, my solution was just one and there may be other ways that the
> >compiler could transpile as to js way faster but it's what I knew at the
> >time and had already done it in a few other projects.
> >
> >Mike
> >
> >On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >
> >> @Harbs,
> >>
> >> I don't know enough about Git and branching to know if this is the right
> >> way to "archive" stuff before deleting, but I would think that branch
> >> would need special handling after it is created because any attempt to
> >> merge with that branch might result in the deletion of that code.
> >>
> >> @Mark & Mike,
> >>
> >> Where would you create such an archive folder such that it doesn't show
> >>up
> >> when grep-ing the code? IMO, that's the goal: on GitHub and locally, I
> >> don't want these files to be found by search tools.
> >>
> >> @Mike,
> >>
> >> I would caution against calling that code base "garbage". It worked
> >>well
> >> enough to produce the early prototypes, and you never know when we might
> >> want to seek the advice and participation of its author. Yeah, some
> >>parts
> >> of it were really hard to learn, but it did do things that I had to go
> >>fix
> >> again in FalconJX, and I think FalconJX still runs several of the phases
> >> of the CompilationUnit code that we may need to stop doing some day for
> >> performance reasons and go through another round of bug fixing when we
> >>do,
> >> because semantic errors seem to be caught during reduction. FalconJS
> >>was
> >> leveraging the CompilationUnit phases.
> >>
> >> -Alex
> >>
> >> On 12/21/15, 3:27 AM, "Michael Schmalle" <te...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Yup, I agree, it doesn't really need to be deleted but it needs to be
> >>so
> >> >far away from FalconJX that a common dev wouldn't mistake it for
> >>anything
> >> >other than archived history.
> >> >
> >> >The code is garbage, another reason why FalconJX even exists, I hated
> >>that
> >> >code with a passion. :)
> >> >
> >> >Mike
> >> >
> >> >On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 6:03 AM, Kessler CTR Mark J <
> >> >mark.kessler.ctr@usmc.mil> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Might as well make an archive folder that's generic and we can put
> >> >> anything else we want to keep but don't want in the main source
> >>areas.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> -Mark
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
Re: [FalconJX] Is it time to delete the FalconJS code?
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
Does anybody have an actual set of steps to create some sort of archival
branch or can I just delete this project?
-Alex
On 12/21/15, 7:50 AM, "Michael Schmalle" <te...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Well garbage is relative. I didn't mean it in a derogatory way, only that
>the original authors were the ones that could understand it.
>
>As far as FlaconJX, I wrote that as a prototype based off of my prior
>experience with AST traversing and the visitor pattern. That was almost 3
>years ago now so as far as it actually getting refactored on an
>application
>level with compilation unit passes, it never happened! :)
>
>When iw rote the front and backend I was more using the Flex compiler as a
>template, and was slowing digesting how the multithreaded compilation
>worked in Falcon.
>
>It that compiler was a full time/part time paid job for myself I could
>easily put time into actually optimizing and documenting how the
>compiler(Falcon) end actually runs. But that is not the case so we have to
>guess right now what actually could be changed.
>
>Besides, my solution was just one and there may be other ways that the
>compiler could transpile as to js way faster but it's what I knew at the
>time and had already done it in a few other projects.
>
>Mike
>
>On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>> @Harbs,
>>
>> I don't know enough about Git and branching to know if this is the right
>> way to "archive" stuff before deleting, but I would think that branch
>> would need special handling after it is created because any attempt to
>> merge with that branch might result in the deletion of that code.
>>
>> @Mark & Mike,
>>
>> Where would you create such an archive folder such that it doesn't show
>>up
>> when grep-ing the code? IMO, that's the goal: on GitHub and locally, I
>> don't want these files to be found by search tools.
>>
>> @Mike,
>>
>> I would caution against calling that code base "garbage". It worked
>>well
>> enough to produce the early prototypes, and you never know when we might
>> want to seek the advice and participation of its author. Yeah, some
>>parts
>> of it were really hard to learn, but it did do things that I had to go
>>fix
>> again in FalconJX, and I think FalconJX still runs several of the phases
>> of the CompilationUnit code that we may need to stop doing some day for
>> performance reasons and go through another round of bug fixing when we
>>do,
>> because semantic errors seem to be caught during reduction. FalconJS
>>was
>> leveraging the CompilationUnit phases.
>>
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 12/21/15, 3:27 AM, "Michael Schmalle" <te...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Yup, I agree, it doesn't really need to be deleted but it needs to be
>>so
>> >far away from FalconJX that a common dev wouldn't mistake it for
>>anything
>> >other than archived history.
>> >
>> >The code is garbage, another reason why FalconJX even exists, I hated
>>that
>> >code with a passion. :)
>> >
>> >Mike
>> >
>> >On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 6:03 AM, Kessler CTR Mark J <
>> >mark.kessler.ctr@usmc.mil> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Might as well make an archive folder that's generic and we can put
>> >> anything else we want to keep but don't want in the main source
>>areas.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> -Mark
>> >>
>>
>>
Re: [FalconJX] Is it time to delete the FalconJS code?
Posted by Michael Schmalle <te...@gmail.com>.
Well garbage is relative. I didn't mean it in a derogatory way, only that
the original authors were the ones that could understand it.
As far as FlaconJX, I wrote that as a prototype based off of my prior
experience with AST traversing and the visitor pattern. That was almost 3
years ago now so as far as it actually getting refactored on an application
level with compilation unit passes, it never happened! :)
When iw rote the front and backend I was more using the Flex compiler as a
template, and was slowing digesting how the multithreaded compilation
worked in Falcon.
It that compiler was a full time/part time paid job for myself I could
easily put time into actually optimizing and documenting how the
compiler(Falcon) end actually runs. But that is not the case so we have to
guess right now what actually could be changed.
Besides, my solution was just one and there may be other ways that the
compiler could transpile as to js way faster but it's what I knew at the
time and had already done it in a few other projects.
Mike
On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
> @Harbs,
>
> I don't know enough about Git and branching to know if this is the right
> way to "archive" stuff before deleting, but I would think that branch
> would need special handling after it is created because any attempt to
> merge with that branch might result in the deletion of that code.
>
> @Mark & Mike,
>
> Where would you create such an archive folder such that it doesn't show up
> when grep-ing the code? IMO, that's the goal: on GitHub and locally, I
> don't want these files to be found by search tools.
>
> @Mike,
>
> I would caution against calling that code base "garbage". It worked well
> enough to produce the early prototypes, and you never know when we might
> want to seek the advice and participation of its author. Yeah, some parts
> of it were really hard to learn, but it did do things that I had to go fix
> again in FalconJX, and I think FalconJX still runs several of the phases
> of the CompilationUnit code that we may need to stop doing some day for
> performance reasons and go through another round of bug fixing when we do,
> because semantic errors seem to be caught during reduction. FalconJS was
> leveraging the CompilationUnit phases.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 12/21/15, 3:27 AM, "Michael Schmalle" <te...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Yup, I agree, it doesn't really need to be deleted but it needs to be so
> >far away from FalconJX that a common dev wouldn't mistake it for anything
> >other than archived history.
> >
> >The code is garbage, another reason why FalconJX even exists, I hated that
> >code with a passion. :)
> >
> >Mike
> >
> >On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 6:03 AM, Kessler CTR Mark J <
> >mark.kessler.ctr@usmc.mil> wrote:
> >
> >> Might as well make an archive folder that's generic and we can put
> >> anything else we want to keep but don't want in the main source areas.
> >>
> >>
> >> -Mark
> >>
>
>
Re: [FalconJX] Is it time to delete the FalconJS code?
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
@Harbs,
I don't know enough about Git and branching to know if this is the right
way to "archive" stuff before deleting, but I would think that branch
would need special handling after it is created because any attempt to
merge with that branch might result in the deletion of that code.
@Mark & Mike,
Where would you create such an archive folder such that it doesn't show up
when grep-ing the code? IMO, that's the goal: on GitHub and locally, I
don't want these files to be found by search tools.
@Mike,
I would caution against calling that code base "garbage". It worked well
enough to produce the early prototypes, and you never know when we might
want to seek the advice and participation of its author. Yeah, some parts
of it were really hard to learn, but it did do things that I had to go fix
again in FalconJX, and I think FalconJX still runs several of the phases
of the CompilationUnit code that we may need to stop doing some day for
performance reasons and go through another round of bug fixing when we do,
because semantic errors seem to be caught during reduction. FalconJS was
leveraging the CompilationUnit phases.
-Alex
On 12/21/15, 3:27 AM, "Michael Schmalle" <te...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Yup, I agree, it doesn't really need to be deleted but it needs to be so
>far away from FalconJX that a common dev wouldn't mistake it for anything
>other than archived history.
>
>The code is garbage, another reason why FalconJX even exists, I hated that
>code with a passion. :)
>
>Mike
>
>On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 6:03 AM, Kessler CTR Mark J <
>mark.kessler.ctr@usmc.mil> wrote:
>
>> Might as well make an archive folder that's generic and we can put
>> anything else we want to keep but don't want in the main source areas.
>>
>>
>> -Mark
>>
Re: [FalconJX] Is it time to delete the FalconJS code?
Posted by Michael Schmalle <te...@gmail.com>.
Yup, I agree, it doesn't really need to be deleted but it needs to be so
far away from FalconJX that a common dev wouldn't mistake it for anything
other than archived history.
The code is garbage, another reason why FalconJX even exists, I hated that
code with a passion. :)
Mike
On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 6:03 AM, Kessler CTR Mark J <
mark.kessler.ctr@usmc.mil> wrote:
> Might as well make an archive folder that's generic and we can put
> anything else we want to keep but don't want in the main source areas.
>
>
> -Mark
>
RE: [FalconJX] Is it time to delete the FalconJS code?
Posted by Kessler CTR Mark J <ma...@usmc.mil>.
Might as well make an archive folder that's generic and we can put anything else we want to keep but don't want in the main source areas.
-Mark