You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@flex.apache.org by Frédéric THOMAS <we...@hotmail.com> on 2014/10/01 13:32:59 UTC
[Falcon] starting up
Hi,
I built it with ANT an ran Falcon compc.bat from the generated/dist/sdk, does anyone knows why I get that ?
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: com/google/common/cache/CacheLoader
at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.MXMLC.<init>(MXMLC.java:379)
at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.<init>(COMPC.java:54)
at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.staticMainNoExit(COMPC.java:75)
at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.main(COMPC.java:63)
Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: com.google.common.cache.CacheLoader
at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)
at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)
at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)
at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:424)
at sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:308)
at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
... 4 more
Thanks,
Frédéric THOMAS
Re: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
On 10/6/14, 3:06 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>Similarly, are there any AS Singleton patterns that are sufficient? Such
>> as:
>>
>> public class MySingleton
>> {
>> public function MySingleton(secretToken:SecretToken)
>> {
>> }
>> }
>> internal class SecretToken
>> {
>> }
>>
>
>This partially works. I can still do:
>
>var instance:MySingleton = new MySingleton(null);
>
>I now need to add a null check in MySingleton's constructor and throw a
>runtime error if secretToken is null.
>
>Whereas, if private constructor is supported, this would be caught in
>compile time.
I don¹t doubt that private constructors would be preferred, but if the VM
isn¹t going to help us, and potentially, the ABC format may make it
impossible/difficult/expensive to make it work, what trade-offs would we
make or what other ideas would work?
Could we teach the compiler that certain parameters cannot be assigned
null? JavaScript seems to have something like that.
Could the compiler just check an ASDoc annotation and detect an attempt to
instantiate from outside the class?
-Alex
Re: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
Posted by OmPrakash Muppirala <bi...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
> Hi Fred,
>
> I have no idea what the right answer is, but I was wondering if you could
> try to describe (in AS code) what scenarios you want to support and not
> support. Is this just for Singletons or are there other use cases? And
> what edge cases are allowed, if any?
>
> For example, if you have code like:
>
> var c:Class = MySingleton;
> var instance:MySingleton = new c();
>
> what would you want to have happen? I¹d guess the compiler cannot check
> it.
>
> Similarly, are there any AS Singleton patterns that are sufficient? Such
> as:
>
> public class MySingleton
> {
> public function MySingleton(secretToken:SecretToken)
> {
> }
> }
> internal class SecretToken
> {
> }
>
This partially works. I can still do:
var instance:MySingleton = new MySingleton(null);
I now need to add a null check in MySingleton's constructor and throw a
runtime error if secretToken is null.
Whereas, if private constructor is supported, this would be caught in
compile time.
Thanks,
Om
>
> Maybe some metadata can cause the compiler to generate different AS that
> is sufficient for your needs. You could even change any call to the
> constructor from within the Singleton source code to some other function
> that initializes the single instance.
>
> Thanks,
> -Alex
>
>
> On 10/6/14, 2:33 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> >Hi Gordon, Darrell, Alex,
> >
> >I've been able to work on it a bit tonight and realized that I was wrong,
> >actually, I can get the right NS infos parsed and emitted but can't get
> >it back thru the ABCParser.
> >I've been confused because I didn't check the Qualifier NS but instead
> >its kind which was 5 (private) as I wanted but it was actually the one of
> >the CMImplicitNS (aka, invalid NS) and wasn,'t able to find in the chain
> >where it has been forced as I thought having removed all the one
> >implicated in defining a ctor NS, I wonder now if the fact that the ctor
> >is not part of a trait is the cause ?
> >
> >Any way, I started to explore other possibilities, one of them is to pass
> >the NS info via MetaTag as done for go_to_definition and use this info in
> >the semantic checker as I can't at the time of the ABC Parsing, set the
> >NS because the Metadata are checked after the methodbody and in more,
> >I've got no info at this point about the super class except its name
> >coming from InstanceInfo (or indirectly via IReference) but would like to
> >think I can manage to use the MetaTag (like
> >"[constructor(ns:'protected')] in the semantic checker, do you see any
> >problem in doing so or if there's a better place and moment to do it
> >except it could be erased by the optimiser ?
> >
> >The last possibility as I didn't see any drawback yet in debugging it in
> >the emitter, is to pass the info directly in the name at FunctionNode
> >construction time and either set the NS accordingly or use this info in
> >the semantic checker, as far as I've debugged it (didn't to the test yet
> >but followed all the emitter chain), I didn't see any problem that could
> >be to emit it and don't think there are any in reading it either thru the
> >ABCParser, I would pass for example pass "protected:MyConstructorName",
> >tweak the FunctionNode:isConstructor accordingly and remove the
> >CMImplitNS checks as I did until now, what do you think, do you see any
> >problem with this approach ?
> >
> >More over if the latter appears to be a valid option, it could be used
> >for the method overloading.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Frédéric THOMAS
> >
> >> Subject: Re: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> >> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
> >> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 09:24:14 -0700
> >> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >>
> >> It's a bit different in that the AVM is strict about access modifiers;
> >>you cannot use reflection to call a private method from outside its
> >>class. However I know developers have wanted non-public constructors for
> >>a long time and most won't care if they're not enforced at runtime, so I
> >>don't object to the compiler enhancement. I just wanted to mention
> >>something that folks should be aware of.
> >>
> >> Another thing to be aware of is that this mean there will be source
> >>code that compiles under a Falcon that doesn't compile under the old
> >>compiler. Would we change the old compiler as we'll or not bother? I'd
> >>say don't bother.
> >>
> >> - Gordon
> >>
> >> > On Oct 5, 2014, at 8:09 AM, "Christofer Dutz"
> >><ch...@c-ware.de> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > But in java this is not much different. Unless you explicitly tell
> >>your Java VM to be strict, you can get a private constructor via
> >>Reflection, make this accesslible at runtime and instantiate it, no
> >>matter what the source-code says. Same with the type of generics.
> >> >
> >> > So I guess it would be a great addition to Flex to at least have
> >>features checked by the compiler, even if the runtime doesn't enforce it.
> >> >
> >> > Chris
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> >> > Von: Gordon Smith [mailto:gsmithsf@hotmail.com]
> >> > Gesendet: Sonntag, 5. Oktober 2014 04:36
> >> > An: dev@flex.apache.org
> >> > Betreff: Re: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> >> >
> >> > In general the ActionScript Virtual Machine enforces access modifiers
> >>(so that, for example, something marked private is truly inaccessible by
> >>any means outside the class) but I don't think the AVM enforces
> >>non-public constructors. I'm guessing that a constructor in the ABC is
> >>public regardless of what the source code says, which would mean that
> >>the constructor could be invoked by any code via reflection. If this is
> >>the case, I'm not convinced we should pretend that constructors can be
> >>non-public.
> >> >
> >> > - Gordon
> >> >
> >> > Sent from my iPad
> >> >
> >> >>> On Oct 4, 2014, at 4:14 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala"
> >><bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Oct 4, 2014 12:55 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS"
> >><we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Hi,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I started to check if it was possible to have private and protected
> >> >> constructor in Falcon and I have to admit it was tricky especially
> >> >> because I never seen a compiler from inside before but it is
> >> >> apparently possible, I've been able to compile successfully:
> >> >>> package myLib {
> >> >>> public class CTORTest {
> >> >>> private var _p:int;
> >> >>>
> >> >>> private function CTORTest(p:int) {
> >> >>> _p = p;
> >> >>> }
> >> >>>
> >> >>> private function anotherFct():CTORTest {
> >> >>> return new CTORTest(10);
> >> >>> }
> >> >>> }
> >> >>> }
> >> >>> and using the compiled lib:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> <?xml version="1.0"?>
> >> >>> <s:Application xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009"
> >> >> xmlns:s="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/spark"
> >> >> creationComplete="creationCompleteHandler(event)">
> >> >>> <fx:Script><![CDATA[
> >> >>> import mx.events.FlexEvent;
> >> >>>
> >> >>> import myLib.CTORTest;
> >> >>>
> >> >>> private function
> >>creationCompleteHandler(event:FlexEvent):void {
> >> >>> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
> >> >>> }
> >> >>> ]]></fx:Script>
> >> >>> </s:Application>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> gives:
> >> >>> [Fault] exception, information=VerifyError: Error #1014: La classe
> >> >> myLib:CTORTest::CTORTest est introuvable. (not found) with the
> >>legacy
> >> >> compiler
> >> >>> and:
> >> >>> F:\sources\falconTestDrive\shell\src\Main.mxml:9
> >> >>> Erreur: Appel d'une méthode qui ne semble pas définie CTORTest.
> >>(Call
> >> >>> to
> >> >> a undefined method)
> >> >>> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
> >> >>>
> >> >>> (I will customize the error message later)
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I still need to check it works in the 3 possible ways to
> >>instantiate
> >> >>> a
> >> >> Class [1] (at the moment it works only with 1st one), check that
> >>works
> >> >> with is / instanceOf, revisit the cast function accordingly and
> >>maybe
> >> >> other things not yet in my mind and especially check FP won't
> >>complain using it.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), new_type_name,
> >> >> ContainerID(expression*)) */
> >> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), expression,
> >> >> ContainerID(expression*)) */
> >> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), vector_literal,
> >> >> ContainerID(void)) */
> >> >>>
> >> >>> In case all this works and I'm far to know it at the moment, I will
> >> >>> have
> >> >> to think about implement "method overloading" otherwise I can't see
> >> >> any usage of a protected constructor and therefore will probably
> >> >> require some help for the best way to implement it.
> >> >>
> >> >> Exciting to see these kind of experiments. A really good usecase
> >>for
> >> >> private constructor would be to create a Singleton class, I.e a
> >>class
> >> >> that cannot be instantiated outside of itself. Would that be
> >> >> something you can test for?
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> Om
> >> >>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Thanks,
> >> >>> Frédéric THOMAS
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
> >> >>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >> >>>> Subject: RE: [Falcon] starting up
> >> >>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 16:57:28 +0100
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Ah ok, thanks Gordon, I was tearing my hair out :-)
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> >> >>>>> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
> >> >>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 08:51:16 -0700
> >> >>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> That comment is out of date. Code Model was the part of pre-Falcon
> >> >> Flash Builder that built an abstract syntax tree to support
> >> >> intelligent editing. We used it as the beginning of Falcon's lexer
> >>and
> >> >> parser. The code is just looking at the AST to see if the
> >>constructor
> >> >> has a non-public namespace.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> - Gordon
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> On Oct 1, 2014, at 8:33 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <
> >> >> webdoublefx@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> I updated it to v17.0 and check in
> >> >> falcon\compiler\generated\dist\sdk\lib\external, is there.
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> oops, looking better, it has both, just removed the bad one, it
> >> >> runs.
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Now, looking at
> >>internal\as\codegen\ClassDirectiveProcessor.java,
> >> >>>>>> I
> >> >> see that:
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> // If a constructor has a namespace as part of it's declaration,
> >> >>>>>> it
> >> >> must be declared public.
> >> >>>>>> // It is ok to omit the namespace
> >> >>>>>> // We must check the AST, as CM treats all ctors as public no
> >> >> matter what the user typed in
> >> >>>>>> // so the FunctionDefinition will always be in the public
> >> >>>>>> namespace if( node.getActualNamespaceNode() != null &&
> >> >>>>>> node.getActualNamespaceNode().getName() !=
> >> >> IASKeywordConstants.PUBLIC)
> >> >>>>>> problems.add(new
> >> >> ConstructorMustBePublicProblem(node.getActualNamespaceNode()));
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> What is the CM or Code Model ?
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Thanks,
> >> >>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> From: aharui@adobe.com
> >> >>>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> >> >>>>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 13:36:50 +0000
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> Could you have an old guava.jar?
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> On 10/1/14 4:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <webdoublefx@hotmail.com
> >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Hi,
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> I built it with ANT an ran Falcon compc.bat from the
> >> >> generated/dist/sdk,
> >> >>>>>>>> does anyone knows why I get that ?
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> >> >>>>>>>> com/google/common/cache/CacheLoader
> >> >>>>>>>> at
> >> >>>>>>>> org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.MXMLC.<init>(MXMLC.java:379)
> >> >>>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.<init>(COMPC.java:54)
> >> >>>>>>>> at
> >> >>
> >>org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.staticMainNoExit(COMPC.java:75)
> >> >>>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.main(COMPC.java:63)
> >> >>>>>>>> Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
> >> >>>>>>>> com.google.common.cache.CacheLoader
> >> >>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)
> >> >>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)
> >> >>>>>>>> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
> >> >>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)
> >> >>>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:424)
> >> >>>>>>>> at
> >> >>>>>>>> sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:308)
> >> >>>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
> >> >>>>>>>> ... 4 more
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >> >>>>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> >> >>>
> >
> >
>
>
Re: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
Not sure I understood your point with the examples. Some of the
[Bindable] code is in BaseVariableNode.java.
On 10/6/14, 4:34 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>I didn't follow the compiler path for Bindable yet even if I understand
>globally what it does but for Singleton, the key would be to pass by an
>internal Class still visible in the same package :P,
>
>And protected and final for private classes ?
>
>public final PrivateClass {
>public function PrivateClass (privateCtor:PrivateClass ) {
>if (privateCtor!= this)
> //ERROR
>}
>}
>
>or only thru protected (extends only):
>
>public class BaseClass {
>public function BaseClass(protectedCtor:BaseClass) {
>if (protectedCtor!= this)
> //ERROR
>}
>}
>
> // (extends only):
>public class SubClass {
>public function SubClass (protectedCtor:SubClass ) {
>super(this);
>}
>}
>
>// public
>public class SubClass2 {
>public function SubClass2 () {
>super(this);
>}
>}
>
>Doing so we've got the same base, is this code correct ?
>
>Frédéric THOMAS
>
>> From: aharui@adobe.com
>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
>> Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 22:53:16 +0000
>>
>> Already, the compiler knows if you do
>>
>> [Bindable]
>> public class MyClass {
>> public var foo:int;
>> }
>>
>> that it should auto-generate some code, then the whole thing is handed
>> down to the reducer/emitter. Seems like you could inject SecretToken
>>in a
>> similar way if someone did:
>>
>> [Singleton]
>> public class MySingleton {
>> }
>>
>>
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 10/6/14, 3:44 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Actually, I guess I would find where and maybe how as I've seen it
>>while
>> >I was debugging the constructor, at emit time, but would mean to
>>generate
>> >"
>> >internal class SecretToken {}" and that I've got no idea when and how.
>> >Frédéric THOMAS
>> >
>> >> From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
>> >> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>> >> Subject: RE: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
>> >> Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 23:27:58 +0100
>> >>
>> >> Hi Alex,
>> >>
>> >> > I have no idea what the right answer is, but I was wondering if you
>> >>could
>> >> > try to describe (in AS code) what scenarios you want to support and
>> >>not
>> >> > support. Is this just for Singletons or are there other use cases?
>> >>And
>> >> > what edge cases are allowed, if any?
>> >>
>> >> It is not only for the singleton, for examle, at some point, I would
>> >>like to be able to do that:
>> >> [Abstract]
>> >> public class BaseClass {
>> >>
>> >> public static const INSTANCE:BaseClass = new BaseClass(11);
>> >>
>> >> private var _p:int;
>> >>
>> >> protected function BaseClass(p:int) {
>> >> _p = p;
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >> public function get p():int;
>> >> }
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >> ---
>> >>
>> >> // Error, p not implemented
>> >> public class SubClass extends BaseClass {
>> >>
>> >> public function SubClass() {
>> >> super(12);
>> >> }
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >> ---
>> >> public class AnotherClass {
>> >>
>> >> public function AnotherClass() {
>> >> const a:BaseClass = new BaseClass(13); // Error, can't
>> >>instantiate a non public ctor.
>> >> }
>> >> }> Maybe some metadata can cause the compiler to generate different
>>AS
>> >>that
>> >> > is sufficient for your needs. You could even change any call to
>>the
>> >> > constructor from within the Singleton source code to some other
>> >>function
>> >> > that initializes the single instance.
>> >>
>> >> Yes, I guess we could eventually generate some ABC code to simulate
>>the
>> >>behavior, just for now, I'm not sure when and how exactly to tell the
>> >>compiler to generate that in case of private ctor, this in case of
>> >>protected, I'm just discovering it but will continue to dig into.
>> >>
>> >> Frédéric THOMAS
>> >>
>> >> > From: aharui@adobe.com
>> >> > To: dev@flex.apache.org
>> >> > Subject: Re: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting
>>up)
>> >> > Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 21:57:09 +0000
>> >> >
>> >> > Hi Fred,
>> >> >
>> >> > I have no idea what the right answer is, but I was wondering if you
>> >>could
>> >> > try to describe (in AS code) what scenarios you want to support and
>> >>not
>> >> > support. Is this just for Singletons or are there other use cases?
>> >>And
>> >> > what edge cases are allowed, if any?
>> >> >
>> >> > For example, if you have code like:
>> >> >
>> >> > var c:Class = MySingleton;
>> >> > var instance:MySingleton = new c();
>> >> >
>> >> > what would you want to have happen? I¹d guess the compiler cannot
>> >>check
>> >> > it.
>> >> >
>> >> > Similarly, are there any AS Singleton patterns that are sufficient?
>> >>Such
>> >> > as:
>> >> >
>> >> > public class MySingleton
>> >> > {
>> >> > public function MySingleton(secretToken:SecretToken)
>> >> > {
>> >> > }
>> >> > }
>> >> > internal class SecretToken
>> >> > {
>> >> > }
>> >> >
>> >> > Maybe some metadata can cause the compiler to generate different AS
>> >>that
>> >> > is sufficient for your needs. You could even change any call to
>>the
>> >> > constructor from within the Singleton source code to some other
>> >>function
>> >> > that initializes the single instance.
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks,
>> >> > -Alex
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On 10/6/14, 2:33 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com>
>> >>wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >Hi Gordon, Darrell, Alex,
>> >> > >
>> >> > >I've been able to work on it a bit tonight and realized that I was
>> >>wrong,
>> >> > >actually, I can get the right NS infos parsed and emitted but
>>can't
>> >>get
>> >> > >it back thru the ABCParser.
>> >> > >I've been confused because I didn't check the Qualifier NS but
>> >>instead
>> >> > >its kind which was 5 (private) as I wanted but it was actually the
>> >>one of
>> >> > >the CMImplicitNS (aka, invalid NS) and wasn,'t able to find in the
>> >>chain
>> >> > >where it has been forced as I thought having removed all the one
>> >> > >implicated in defining a ctor NS, I wonder now if the fact that
>>the
>> >>ctor
>> >> > >is not part of a trait is the cause ?
>> >> > >
>> >> > >Any way, I started to explore other possibilities, one of them is
>>to
>> >>pass
>> >> > >the NS info via MetaTag as done for go_to_definition and use this
>> >>info in
>> >> > >the semantic checker as I can't at the time of the ABC Parsing,
>>set
>> >>the
>> >> > >NS because the Metadata are checked after the methodbody and in
>>more,
>> >> > >I've got no info at this point about the super class except its
>>name
>> >> > >coming from InstanceInfo (or indirectly via IReference) but would
>> >>like to
>> >> > >think I can manage to use the MetaTag (like
>> >> > >"[constructor(ns:'protected')] in the semantic checker, do you
>>see
>> >>any
>> >> > >problem in doing so or if there's a better place and moment to do
>>it
>> >> > >except it could be erased by the optimiser ?
>> >> > >
>> >> > >The last possibility as I didn't see any drawback yet in debugging
>> >>it in
>> >> > >the emitter, is to pass the info directly in the name at
>>FunctionNode
>> >> > >construction time and either set the NS accordingly or use this
>>info
>> >>in
>> >> > >the semantic checker, as far as I've debugged it (didn't to the
>> >>test yet
>> >> > >but followed all the emitter chain), I didn't see any problem that
>> >>could
>> >> > >be to emit it and don't think there are any in reading it either
>> >>thru the
>> >> > >ABCParser, I would pass for example pass
>> >>"protected:MyConstructorName",
>> >> > >tweak the FunctionNode:isConstructor accordingly and remove the
>> >> > >CMImplitNS checks as I did until now, what do you think, do you
>>see
>> >>any
>> >> > >problem with this approach ?
>> >> > >
>> >> > >More over if the latter appears to be a valid option, it could be
>> >>used
>> >> > >for the method overloading.
>> >> > >
>> >> > >Thanks,
>> >> > >Frédéric THOMAS
>> >> > >
>> >> > >> Subject: Re: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting
>> >>up)
>> >> > >> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
>> >> > >> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 09:24:14 -0700
>> >> > >> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> It's a bit different in that the AVM is strict about access
>> >>modifiers;
>> >> > >>you cannot use reflection to call a private method from outside
>>its
>> >> > >>class. However I know developers have wanted non-public
>> >>constructors for
>> >> > >>a long time and most won't care if they're not enforced at
>>runtime,
>> >>so I
>> >> > >>don't object to the compiler enhancement. I just wanted to
>>mention
>> >> > >>something that folks should be aware of.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> Another thing to be aware of is that this mean there will be
>>source
>> >> > >>code that compiles under a Falcon that doesn't compile under the
>>old
>> >> > >>compiler. Would we change the old compiler as we'll or not
>>bother?
>> >>I'd
>> >> > >>say don't bother.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> - Gordon
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> > On Oct 5, 2014, at 8:09 AM, "Christofer Dutz"
>> >> > >><ch...@c-ware.de> wrote:
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > But in java this is not much different. Unless you explicitly
>> >>tell
>> >> > >>your Java VM to be strict, you can get a private constructor via
>> >> > >>Reflection, make this accesslible at runtime and instantiate it,
>>no
>> >> > >>matter what the source-code says. Same with the type of generics.
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > So I guess it would be a great addition to Flex to at least
>>have
>> >> > >>features checked by the compiler, even if the runtime doesn't
>> >>enforce it.
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > Chris
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> >> > >> > Von: Gordon Smith [mailto:gsmithsf@hotmail.com]
>> >> > >> > Gesendet: Sonntag, 5. Oktober 2014 04:36
>> >> > >> > An: dev@flex.apache.org
>> >> > >> > Betreff: Re: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting
>>up)
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > In general the ActionScript Virtual Machine enforces access
>> >>modifiers
>> >> > >>(so that, for example, something marked private is truly
>> >>inaccessible by
>> >> > >>any means outside the class) but I don't think the AVM enforces
>> >> > >>non-public constructors. I'm guessing that a constructor in the
>>ABC
>> >>is
>> >> > >>public regardless of what the source code says, which would mean
>> >>that
>> >> > >>the constructor could be invoked by any code via reflection. If
>> >>this is
>> >> > >>the case, I'm not convinced we should pretend that constructors
>>can
>> >>be
>> >> > >>non-public.
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > - Gordon
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > Sent from my iPad
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> >>> On Oct 4, 2014, at 4:14 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala"
>> >> > >><bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > >> >>>
>> >> > >> >>> On Oct 4, 2014 12:55 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS"
>> >> > >><we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > >> >>>
>> >> > >> >>> Hi,
>> >> > >> >>>
>> >> > >> >>> I started to check if it was possible to have private and
>> >>protected
>> >> > >> >> constructor in Falcon and I have to admit it was tricky
>> >>especially
>> >> > >> >> because I never seen a compiler from inside before but it is
>> >> > >> >> apparently possible, I've been able to compile successfully:
>> >> > >> >>> package myLib {
>> >> > >> >>> public class CTORTest {
>> >> > >> >>> private var _p:int;
>> >> > >> >>>
>> >> > >> >>> private function CTORTest(p:int) {
>> >> > >> >>> _p = p;
>> >> > >> >>> }
>> >> > >> >>>
>> >> > >> >>> private function anotherFct():CTORTest {
>> >> > >> >>> return new CTORTest(10);
>> >> > >> >>> }
>> >> > >> >>> }
>> >> > >> >>> }
>> >> > >> >>> and using the compiled lib:
>> >> > >> >>>
>> >> > >> >>> <?xml version="1.0"?>
>> >> > >> >>> <s:Application xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009"
>> >> > >> >> xmlns:s="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/spark"
>> >> > >> >> creationComplete="creationCompleteHandler(event)">
>> >> > >> >>> <fx:Script><![CDATA[
>> >> > >> >>> import mx.events.FlexEvent;
>> >> > >> >>>
>> >> > >> >>> import myLib.CTORTest;
>> >> > >> >>>
>> >> > >> >>> private function
>> >> > >>creationCompleteHandler(event:FlexEvent):void {
>> >> > >> >>> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
>> >> > >> >>> }
>> >> > >> >>> ]]></fx:Script>
>> >> > >> >>> </s:Application>
>> >> > >> >>>
>> >> > >> >>> gives:
>> >> > >> >>> [Fault] exception, information=VerifyError: Error #1014: La
>> >>classe
>> >> > >> >> myLib:CTORTest::CTORTest est introuvable. (not found) with
>>the
>> >> > >>legacy
>> >> > >> >> compiler
>> >> > >> >>> and:
>> >> > >> >>> F:\sources\falconTestDrive\shell\src\Main.mxml:9
>> >> > >> >>> Erreur: Appel d'une méthode qui ne semble pas définie
>>CTORTest.
>> >> > >>(Call
>> >> > >> >>> to
>> >> > >> >> a undefined method)
>> >> > >> >>> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
>> >> > >> >>>
>> >> > >> >>> (I will customize the error message later)
>> >> > >> >>>
>> >> > >> >>> I still need to check it works in the 3 possible ways to
>> >> > >>instantiate
>> >> > >> >>> a
>> >> > >> >> Class [1] (at the moment it works only with 1st one), check
>>that
>> >> > >>works
>> >> > >> >> with is / instanceOf, revisit the cast function accordingly
>>and
>> >> > >>maybe
>> >> > >> >> other things not yet in my mind and especially check FP won't
>> >> > >>complain using it.
>> >> > >> >>>
>> >> > >> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void),
>> >>new_type_name,
>> >> > >> >> ContainerID(expression*)) */
>> >> > >> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void),
>>expression,
>> >> > >> >> ContainerID(expression*)) */
>> >> > >> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void),
>> >>vector_literal,
>> >> > >> >> ContainerID(void)) */
>> >> > >> >>>
>> >> > >> >>> In case all this works and I'm far to know it at the
>>moment, I
>> >>will
>> >> > >> >>> have
>> >> > >> >> to think about implement "method overloading" otherwise I
>>can't
>> >>see
>> >> > >> >> any usage of a protected constructor and therefore will
>>probably
>> >> > >> >> require some help for the best way to implement it.
>> >> > >> >>
>> >> > >> >> Exciting to see these kind of experiments. A really good
>> >>usecase
>> >> > >>for
>> >> > >> >> private constructor would be to create a Singleton class,
>>I.e a
>> >> > >>class
>> >> > >> >> that cannot be instantiated outside of itself. Would that be
>> >> > >> >> something you can test for?
>> >> > >> >>
>> >> > >> >> Thanks,
>> >> > >> >> Om
>> >> > >> >>
>> >> > >> >>>
>> >> > >> >>> Thanks,
>> >> > >> >>> Frédéric THOMAS
>> >> > >> >>>
>> >> > >> >>>> From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
>> >> > >> >>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>> >> > >> >>>> Subject: RE: [Falcon] starting up
>> >> > >> >>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 16:57:28 +0100
>> >> > >> >>>>
>> >> > >> >>>> Ah ok, thanks Gordon, I was tearing my hair out :-)
>> >> > >> >>>>
>> >> > >> >>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>> >> > >> >>>>
>> >> > >> >>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
>> >> > >> >>>>> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
>> >> > >> >>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 08:51:16 -0700
>> >> > >> >>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>> >> > >> >>>>>
>> >> > >> >>>>> That comment is out of date. Code Model was the part of
>> >>pre-Falcon
>> >> > >> >> Flash Builder that built an abstract syntax tree to support
>> >> > >> >> intelligent editing. We used it as the beginning of Falcon's
>> >>lexer
>> >> > >>and
>> >> > >> >> parser. The code is just looking at the AST to see if the
>> >> > >>constructor
>> >> > >> >> has a non-public namespace.
>> >> > >> >>>>>
>> >> > >> >>>>> - Gordon
>> >> > >> >>>>>
>> >> > >> >>>>>> On Oct 1, 2014, at 8:33 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <
>> >> > >> >> webdoublefx@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > >> >>>>>>
>> >> > >> >>>>>>
>> >> > >> >>>>>>
>> >> > >> >>>>>>
>> >> > >> >>>>>>
>> >> > >> >>>>>>
>> >> > >> >>>>>>
>> >> > >> >>>>>> I updated it to v17.0 and check in
>> >> > >> >> falcon\compiler\generated\dist\sdk\lib\external, is there.
>> >> > >> >>>>>>
>> >> > >> >>>>>> oops, looking better, it has both, just removed the bad
>> >>one, it
>> >> > >> >> runs.
>> >> > >> >>>>>>
>> >> > >> >>>>>> Now, looking at
>> >> > >>internal\as\codegen\ClassDirectiveProcessor.java,
>> >> > >> >>>>>> I
>> >> > >> >> see that:
>> >> > >> >>>>>>
>> >> > >> >>>>>> // If a constructor has a namespace as part of it's
>> >>declaration,
>> >> > >> >>>>>> it
>> >> > >> >> must be declared public.
>> >> > >> >>>>>> // It is ok to omit the namespace
>> >> > >> >>>>>> // We must check the AST, as CM treats all ctors as
>>public
>> >>no
>> >> > >> >> matter what the user typed in
>> >> > >> >>>>>> // so the FunctionDefinition will always be in the public
>> >> > >> >>>>>> namespace if( node.getActualNamespaceNode() != null &&
>> >> > >> >>>>>> node.getActualNamespaceNode().getName() !=
>> >> > >> >> IASKeywordConstants.PUBLIC)
>> >> > >> >>>>>> problems.add(new
>> >> > >> >>
>>ConstructorMustBePublicProblem(node.getActualNamespaceNode()));
>> >> > >> >>>>>>
>> >> > >> >>>>>> What is the CM or Code Model ?
>> >> > >> >>>>>>
>> >> > >> >>>>>> Thanks,
>> >> > >> >>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>> >> > >> >>>>>>
>> >> > >> >>>>>>> From: aharui@adobe.com
>> >> > >> >>>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>> >> > >> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
>> >> > >> >>>>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 13:36:50 +0000
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>
>> >> > >> >>>>>>> Could you have an old guava.jar?
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> On 10/1/14 4:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS"
>> >><we...@hotmail.com>
>> >> > >> >> wrote:
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> Hi,
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> I built it with ANT an ran Falcon compc.bat from the
>> >> > >> >> generated/dist/sdk,
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> does anyone knows why I get that ?
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> Exception in thread "main"
>>java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> com/google/common/cache/CacheLoader
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> at
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >>org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.MXMLC.<init>(MXMLC.java:379)
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> at
>> >>org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.<init>(COMPC.java:54)
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> at
>> >> > >> >>
>> >> >
>>
>>>>>>org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.staticMainNoExit(COMPC.java:75
>>>>>>)
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> at
>> >>org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.main(COMPC.java:63)
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> com.google.common.cache.CacheLoader
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> at
>>java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> at
>>java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native
>> >>Method)
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> at
>> >>java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> at
>>java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:424)
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> at
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >>sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:308)
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> at
>>java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> ... 4 more
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> Thanks,
>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>> >> > >> >>>
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
>
RE: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
Posted by Frédéric THOMAS <we...@hotmail.com>.
I didn't follow the compiler path for Bindable yet even if I understand globally what it does but for Singleton, the key would be to pass by an internal Class still visible in the same package :P,
And protected and final for private classes ?
public final PrivateClass {
public function PrivateClass (privateCtor:PrivateClass ) {
if (privateCtor!= this)
//ERROR
}
}
or only thru protected (extends only):
public class BaseClass {
public function BaseClass(protectedCtor:BaseClass) {
if (protectedCtor!= this)
//ERROR
}
}
// (extends only):
public class SubClass {
public function SubClass (protectedCtor:SubClass ) {
super(this);
}
}
// public
public class SubClass2 {
public function SubClass2 () {
super(this);
}
}
Doing so we've got the same base, is this code correct ?
Frédéric THOMAS
> From: aharui@adobe.com
> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> Subject: Re: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 22:53:16 +0000
>
> Already, the compiler knows if you do
>
> [Bindable]
> public class MyClass {
> public var foo:int;
> }
>
> that it should auto-generate some code, then the whole thing is handed
> down to the reducer/emitter. Seems like you could inject SecretToken in a
> similar way if someone did:
>
> [Singleton]
> public class MySingleton {
> }
>
>
> -Alex
>
> On 10/6/14, 3:44 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Actually, I guess I would find where and maybe how as I've seen it while
> >I was debugging the constructor, at emit time, but would mean to generate
> >"
> >internal class SecretToken {}" and that I've got no idea when and how.
> >Frédéric THOMAS
> >
> >> From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
> >> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >> Subject: RE: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> >> Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 23:27:58 +0100
> >>
> >> Hi Alex,
> >>
> >> > I have no idea what the right answer is, but I was wondering if you
> >>could
> >> > try to describe (in AS code) what scenarios you want to support and
> >>not
> >> > support. Is this just for Singletons or are there other use cases?
> >>And
> >> > what edge cases are allowed, if any?
> >>
> >> It is not only for the singleton, for examle, at some point, I would
> >>like to be able to do that:
> >> [Abstract]
> >> public class BaseClass {
> >>
> >> public static const INSTANCE:BaseClass = new BaseClass(11);
> >>
> >> private var _p:int;
> >>
> >> protected function BaseClass(p:int) {
> >> _p = p;
> >> }
> >>
> >> public function get p():int;
> >> }
> >> }
> >>
> >> ---
> >>
> >> // Error, p not implemented
> >> public class SubClass extends BaseClass {
> >>
> >> public function SubClass() {
> >> super(12);
> >> }
> >> }
> >>
> >> ---
> >> public class AnotherClass {
> >>
> >> public function AnotherClass() {
> >> const a:BaseClass = new BaseClass(13); // Error, can't
> >>instantiate a non public ctor.
> >> }
> >> }> Maybe some metadata can cause the compiler to generate different AS
> >>that
> >> > is sufficient for your needs. You could even change any call to the
> >> > constructor from within the Singleton source code to some other
> >>function
> >> > that initializes the single instance.
> >>
> >> Yes, I guess we could eventually generate some ABC code to simulate the
> >>behavior, just for now, I'm not sure when and how exactly to tell the
> >>compiler to generate that in case of private ctor, this in case of
> >>protected, I'm just discovering it but will continue to dig into.
> >>
> >> Frédéric THOMAS
> >>
> >> > From: aharui@adobe.com
> >> > To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >> > Subject: Re: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> >> > Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 21:57:09 +0000
> >> >
> >> > Hi Fred,
> >> >
> >> > I have no idea what the right answer is, but I was wondering if you
> >>could
> >> > try to describe (in AS code) what scenarios you want to support and
> >>not
> >> > support. Is this just for Singletons or are there other use cases?
> >>And
> >> > what edge cases are allowed, if any?
> >> >
> >> > For example, if you have code like:
> >> >
> >> > var c:Class = MySingleton;
> >> > var instance:MySingleton = new c();
> >> >
> >> > what would you want to have happen? I¹d guess the compiler cannot
> >>check
> >> > it.
> >> >
> >> > Similarly, are there any AS Singleton patterns that are sufficient?
> >>Such
> >> > as:
> >> >
> >> > public class MySingleton
> >> > {
> >> > public function MySingleton(secretToken:SecretToken)
> >> > {
> >> > }
> >> > }
> >> > internal class SecretToken
> >> > {
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > Maybe some metadata can cause the compiler to generate different AS
> >>that
> >> > is sufficient for your needs. You could even change any call to the
> >> > constructor from within the Singleton source code to some other
> >>function
> >> > that initializes the single instance.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > -Alex
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 10/6/14, 2:33 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com>
> >>wrote:
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >Hi Gordon, Darrell, Alex,
> >> > >
> >> > >I've been able to work on it a bit tonight and realized that I was
> >>wrong,
> >> > >actually, I can get the right NS infos parsed and emitted but can't
> >>get
> >> > >it back thru the ABCParser.
> >> > >I've been confused because I didn't check the Qualifier NS but
> >>instead
> >> > >its kind which was 5 (private) as I wanted but it was actually the
> >>one of
> >> > >the CMImplicitNS (aka, invalid NS) and wasn,'t able to find in the
> >>chain
> >> > >where it has been forced as I thought having removed all the one
> >> > >implicated in defining a ctor NS, I wonder now if the fact that the
> >>ctor
> >> > >is not part of a trait is the cause ?
> >> > >
> >> > >Any way, I started to explore other possibilities, one of them is to
> >>pass
> >> > >the NS info via MetaTag as done for go_to_definition and use this
> >>info in
> >> > >the semantic checker as I can't at the time of the ABC Parsing, set
> >>the
> >> > >NS because the Metadata are checked after the methodbody and in more,
> >> > >I've got no info at this point about the super class except its name
> >> > >coming from InstanceInfo (or indirectly via IReference) but would
> >>like to
> >> > >think I can manage to use the MetaTag (like
> >> > >"[constructor(ns:'protected')] in the semantic checker, do you see
> >>any
> >> > >problem in doing so or if there's a better place and moment to do it
> >> > >except it could be erased by the optimiser ?
> >> > >
> >> > >The last possibility as I didn't see any drawback yet in debugging
> >>it in
> >> > >the emitter, is to pass the info directly in the name at FunctionNode
> >> > >construction time and either set the NS accordingly or use this info
> >>in
> >> > >the semantic checker, as far as I've debugged it (didn't to the
> >>test yet
> >> > >but followed all the emitter chain), I didn't see any problem that
> >>could
> >> > >be to emit it and don't think there are any in reading it either
> >>thru the
> >> > >ABCParser, I would pass for example pass
> >>"protected:MyConstructorName",
> >> > >tweak the FunctionNode:isConstructor accordingly and remove the
> >> > >CMImplitNS checks as I did until now, what do you think, do you see
> >>any
> >> > >problem with this approach ?
> >> > >
> >> > >More over if the latter appears to be a valid option, it could be
> >>used
> >> > >for the method overloading.
> >> > >
> >> > >Thanks,
> >> > >Frédéric THOMAS
> >> > >
> >> > >> Subject: Re: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting
> >>up)
> >> > >> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
> >> > >> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 09:24:14 -0700
> >> > >> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >> > >>
> >> > >> It's a bit different in that the AVM is strict about access
> >>modifiers;
> >> > >>you cannot use reflection to call a private method from outside its
> >> > >>class. However I know developers have wanted non-public
> >>constructors for
> >> > >>a long time and most won't care if they're not enforced at runtime,
> >>so I
> >> > >>don't object to the compiler enhancement. I just wanted to mention
> >> > >>something that folks should be aware of.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Another thing to be aware of is that this mean there will be source
> >> > >>code that compiles under a Falcon that doesn't compile under the old
> >> > >>compiler. Would we change the old compiler as we'll or not bother?
> >>I'd
> >> > >>say don't bother.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> - Gordon
> >> > >>
> >> > >> > On Oct 5, 2014, at 8:09 AM, "Christofer Dutz"
> >> > >><ch...@c-ware.de> wrote:
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > But in java this is not much different. Unless you explicitly
> >>tell
> >> > >>your Java VM to be strict, you can get a private constructor via
> >> > >>Reflection, make this accesslible at runtime and instantiate it, no
> >> > >>matter what the source-code says. Same with the type of generics.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > So I guess it would be a great addition to Flex to at least have
> >> > >>features checked by the compiler, even if the runtime doesn't
> >>enforce it.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > Chris
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> >> > >> > Von: Gordon Smith [mailto:gsmithsf@hotmail.com]
> >> > >> > Gesendet: Sonntag, 5. Oktober 2014 04:36
> >> > >> > An: dev@flex.apache.org
> >> > >> > Betreff: Re: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > In general the ActionScript Virtual Machine enforces access
> >>modifiers
> >> > >>(so that, for example, something marked private is truly
> >>inaccessible by
> >> > >>any means outside the class) but I don't think the AVM enforces
> >> > >>non-public constructors. I'm guessing that a constructor in the ABC
> >>is
> >> > >>public regardless of what the source code says, which would mean
> >>that
> >> > >>the constructor could be invoked by any code via reflection. If
> >>this is
> >> > >>the case, I'm not convinced we should pretend that constructors can
> >>be
> >> > >>non-public.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > - Gordon
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > Sent from my iPad
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >>> On Oct 4, 2014, at 4:14 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala"
> >> > >><bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> On Oct 4, 2014 12:55 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS"
> >> > >><we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> Hi,
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> I started to check if it was possible to have private and
> >>protected
> >> > >> >> constructor in Falcon and I have to admit it was tricky
> >>especially
> >> > >> >> because I never seen a compiler from inside before but it is
> >> > >> >> apparently possible, I've been able to compile successfully:
> >> > >> >>> package myLib {
> >> > >> >>> public class CTORTest {
> >> > >> >>> private var _p:int;
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> private function CTORTest(p:int) {
> >> > >> >>> _p = p;
> >> > >> >>> }
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> private function anotherFct():CTORTest {
> >> > >> >>> return new CTORTest(10);
> >> > >> >>> }
> >> > >> >>> }
> >> > >> >>> }
> >> > >> >>> and using the compiled lib:
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> <?xml version="1.0"?>
> >> > >> >>> <s:Application xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009"
> >> > >> >> xmlns:s="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/spark"
> >> > >> >> creationComplete="creationCompleteHandler(event)">
> >> > >> >>> <fx:Script><![CDATA[
> >> > >> >>> import mx.events.FlexEvent;
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> import myLib.CTORTest;
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> private function
> >> > >>creationCompleteHandler(event:FlexEvent):void {
> >> > >> >>> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
> >> > >> >>> }
> >> > >> >>> ]]></fx:Script>
> >> > >> >>> </s:Application>
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> gives:
> >> > >> >>> [Fault] exception, information=VerifyError: Error #1014: La
> >>classe
> >> > >> >> myLib:CTORTest::CTORTest est introuvable. (not found) with the
> >> > >>legacy
> >> > >> >> compiler
> >> > >> >>> and:
> >> > >> >>> F:\sources\falconTestDrive\shell\src\Main.mxml:9
> >> > >> >>> Erreur: Appel d'une méthode qui ne semble pas définie CTORTest.
> >> > >>(Call
> >> > >> >>> to
> >> > >> >> a undefined method)
> >> > >> >>> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> (I will customize the error message later)
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> I still need to check it works in the 3 possible ways to
> >> > >>instantiate
> >> > >> >>> a
> >> > >> >> Class [1] (at the moment it works only with 1st one), check that
> >> > >>works
> >> > >> >> with is / instanceOf, revisit the cast function accordingly and
> >> > >>maybe
> >> > >> >> other things not yet in my mind and especially check FP won't
> >> > >>complain using it.
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void),
> >>new_type_name,
> >> > >> >> ContainerID(expression*)) */
> >> > >> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), expression,
> >> > >> >> ContainerID(expression*)) */
> >> > >> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void),
> >>vector_literal,
> >> > >> >> ContainerID(void)) */
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> In case all this works and I'm far to know it at the moment, I
> >>will
> >> > >> >>> have
> >> > >> >> to think about implement "method overloading" otherwise I can't
> >>see
> >> > >> >> any usage of a protected constructor and therefore will probably
> >> > >> >> require some help for the best way to implement it.
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >> Exciting to see these kind of experiments. A really good
> >>usecase
> >> > >>for
> >> > >> >> private constructor would be to create a Singleton class, I.e a
> >> > >>class
> >> > >> >> that cannot be instantiated outside of itself. Would that be
> >> > >> >> something you can test for?
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >> Thanks,
> >> > >> >> Om
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> Thanks,
> >> > >> >>> Frédéric THOMAS
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>>> From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
> >> > >> >>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >> > >> >>>> Subject: RE: [Falcon] starting up
> >> > >> >>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 16:57:28 +0100
> >> > >> >>>>
> >> > >> >>>> Ah ok, thanks Gordon, I was tearing my hair out :-)
> >> > >> >>>>
> >> > >> >>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> >> > >> >>>>
> >> > >> >>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> >> > >> >>>>> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
> >> > >> >>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 08:51:16 -0700
> >> > >> >>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >> > >> >>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>> That comment is out of date. Code Model was the part of
> >>pre-Falcon
> >> > >> >> Flash Builder that built an abstract syntax tree to support
> >> > >> >> intelligent editing. We used it as the beginning of Falcon's
> >>lexer
> >> > >>and
> >> > >> >> parser. The code is just looking at the AST to see if the
> >> > >>constructor
> >> > >> >> has a non-public namespace.
> >> > >> >>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>> - Gordon
> >> > >> >>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> On Oct 1, 2014, at 8:33 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <
> >> > >> >> webdoublefx@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> I updated it to v17.0 and check in
> >> > >> >> falcon\compiler\generated\dist\sdk\lib\external, is there.
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> oops, looking better, it has both, just removed the bad
> >>one, it
> >> > >> >> runs.
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> Now, looking at
> >> > >>internal\as\codegen\ClassDirectiveProcessor.java,
> >> > >> >>>>>> I
> >> > >> >> see that:
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> // If a constructor has a namespace as part of it's
> >>declaration,
> >> > >> >>>>>> it
> >> > >> >> must be declared public.
> >> > >> >>>>>> // It is ok to omit the namespace
> >> > >> >>>>>> // We must check the AST, as CM treats all ctors as public
> >>no
> >> > >> >> matter what the user typed in
> >> > >> >>>>>> // so the FunctionDefinition will always be in the public
> >> > >> >>>>>> namespace if( node.getActualNamespaceNode() != null &&
> >> > >> >>>>>> node.getActualNamespaceNode().getName() !=
> >> > >> >> IASKeywordConstants.PUBLIC)
> >> > >> >>>>>> problems.add(new
> >> > >> >> ConstructorMustBePublicProblem(node.getActualNamespaceNode()));
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> What is the CM or Code Model ?
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> Thanks,
> >> > >> >>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>> From: aharui@adobe.com
> >> > >> >>>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >> > >> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> >> > >> >>>>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 13:36:50 +0000
> >> > >> >>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>> Could you have an old guava.jar?
> >> > >> >>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> On 10/1/14 4:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS"
> >><we...@hotmail.com>
> >> > >> >> wrote:
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> Hi,
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> I built it with ANT an ran Falcon compc.bat from the
> >> > >> >> generated/dist/sdk,
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> does anyone knows why I get that ?
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> com/google/common/cache/CacheLoader
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> at
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>
> >>org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.MXMLC.<init>(MXMLC.java:379)
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> at
> >>org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.<init>(COMPC.java:54)
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> at
> >> > >> >>
> >> >
> >>>>org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.staticMainNoExit(COMPC.java:75)
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> at
> >>org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.main(COMPC.java:63)
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> com.google.common.cache.CacheLoader
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native
> >>Method)
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> at
> >>java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:424)
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> at
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>
> >>sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:308)
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> ... 4 more
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
>
Re: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
Already, the compiler knows if you do
[Bindable]
public class MyClass {
public var foo:int;
}
that it should auto-generate some code, then the whole thing is handed
down to the reducer/emitter. Seems like you could inject SecretToken in a
similar way if someone did:
[Singleton]
public class MySingleton {
}
-Alex
On 10/6/14, 3:44 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Actually, I guess I would find where and maybe how as I've seen it while
>I was debugging the constructor, at emit time, but would mean to generate
>"
>internal class SecretToken {}" and that I've got no idea when and how.
>Frédéric THOMAS
>
>> From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>> Subject: RE: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
>> Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 23:27:58 +0100
>>
>> Hi Alex,
>>
>> > I have no idea what the right answer is, but I was wondering if you
>>could
>> > try to describe (in AS code) what scenarios you want to support and
>>not
>> > support. Is this just for Singletons or are there other use cases?
>>And
>> > what edge cases are allowed, if any?
>>
>> It is not only for the singleton, for examle, at some point, I would
>>like to be able to do that:
>> [Abstract]
>> public class BaseClass {
>>
>> public static const INSTANCE:BaseClass = new BaseClass(11);
>>
>> private var _p:int;
>>
>> protected function BaseClass(p:int) {
>> _p = p;
>> }
>>
>> public function get p():int;
>> }
>> }
>>
>> ---
>>
>> // Error, p not implemented
>> public class SubClass extends BaseClass {
>>
>> public function SubClass() {
>> super(12);
>> }
>> }
>>
>> ---
>> public class AnotherClass {
>>
>> public function AnotherClass() {
>> const a:BaseClass = new BaseClass(13); // Error, can't
>>instantiate a non public ctor.
>> }
>> }> Maybe some metadata can cause the compiler to generate different AS
>>that
>> > is sufficient for your needs. You could even change any call to the
>> > constructor from within the Singleton source code to some other
>>function
>> > that initializes the single instance.
>>
>> Yes, I guess we could eventually generate some ABC code to simulate the
>>behavior, just for now, I'm not sure when and how exactly to tell the
>>compiler to generate that in case of private ctor, this in case of
>>protected, I'm just discovering it but will continue to dig into.
>>
>> Frédéric THOMAS
>>
>> > From: aharui@adobe.com
>> > To: dev@flex.apache.org
>> > Subject: Re: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
>> > Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 21:57:09 +0000
>> >
>> > Hi Fred,
>> >
>> > I have no idea what the right answer is, but I was wondering if you
>>could
>> > try to describe (in AS code) what scenarios you want to support and
>>not
>> > support. Is this just for Singletons or are there other use cases?
>>And
>> > what edge cases are allowed, if any?
>> >
>> > For example, if you have code like:
>> >
>> > var c:Class = MySingleton;
>> > var instance:MySingleton = new c();
>> >
>> > what would you want to have happen? I¹d guess the compiler cannot
>>check
>> > it.
>> >
>> > Similarly, are there any AS Singleton patterns that are sufficient?
>>Such
>> > as:
>> >
>> > public class MySingleton
>> > {
>> > public function MySingleton(secretToken:SecretToken)
>> > {
>> > }
>> > }
>> > internal class SecretToken
>> > {
>> > }
>> >
>> > Maybe some metadata can cause the compiler to generate different AS
>>that
>> > is sufficient for your needs. You could even change any call to the
>> > constructor from within the Singleton source code to some other
>>function
>> > that initializes the single instance.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > -Alex
>> >
>> >
>> > On 10/6/14, 2:33 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com>
>>wrote:
>> >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >Hi Gordon, Darrell, Alex,
>> > >
>> > >I've been able to work on it a bit tonight and realized that I was
>>wrong,
>> > >actually, I can get the right NS infos parsed and emitted but can't
>>get
>> > >it back thru the ABCParser.
>> > >I've been confused because I didn't check the Qualifier NS but
>>instead
>> > >its kind which was 5 (private) as I wanted but it was actually the
>>one of
>> > >the CMImplicitNS (aka, invalid NS) and wasn,'t able to find in the
>>chain
>> > >where it has been forced as I thought having removed all the one
>> > >implicated in defining a ctor NS, I wonder now if the fact that the
>>ctor
>> > >is not part of a trait is the cause ?
>> > >
>> > >Any way, I started to explore other possibilities, one of them is to
>>pass
>> > >the NS info via MetaTag as done for go_to_definition and use this
>>info in
>> > >the semantic checker as I can't at the time of the ABC Parsing, set
>>the
>> > >NS because the Metadata are checked after the methodbody and in more,
>> > >I've got no info at this point about the super class except its name
>> > >coming from InstanceInfo (or indirectly via IReference) but would
>>like to
>> > >think I can manage to use the MetaTag (like
>> > >"[constructor(ns:'protected')] in the semantic checker, do you see
>>any
>> > >problem in doing so or if there's a better place and moment to do it
>> > >except it could be erased by the optimiser ?
>> > >
>> > >The last possibility as I didn't see any drawback yet in debugging
>>it in
>> > >the emitter, is to pass the info directly in the name at FunctionNode
>> > >construction time and either set the NS accordingly or use this info
>>in
>> > >the semantic checker, as far as I've debugged it (didn't to the
>>test yet
>> > >but followed all the emitter chain), I didn't see any problem that
>>could
>> > >be to emit it and don't think there are any in reading it either
>>thru the
>> > >ABCParser, I would pass for example pass
>>"protected:MyConstructorName",
>> > >tweak the FunctionNode:isConstructor accordingly and remove the
>> > >CMImplitNS checks as I did until now, what do you think, do you see
>>any
>> > >problem with this approach ?
>> > >
>> > >More over if the latter appears to be a valid option, it could be
>>used
>> > >for the method overloading.
>> > >
>> > >Thanks,
>> > >Frédéric THOMAS
>> > >
>> > >> Subject: Re: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting
>>up)
>> > >> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
>> > >> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 09:24:14 -0700
>> > >> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>> > >>
>> > >> It's a bit different in that the AVM is strict about access
>>modifiers;
>> > >>you cannot use reflection to call a private method from outside its
>> > >>class. However I know developers have wanted non-public
>>constructors for
>> > >>a long time and most won't care if they're not enforced at runtime,
>>so I
>> > >>don't object to the compiler enhancement. I just wanted to mention
>> > >>something that folks should be aware of.
>> > >>
>> > >> Another thing to be aware of is that this mean there will be source
>> > >>code that compiles under a Falcon that doesn't compile under the old
>> > >>compiler. Would we change the old compiler as we'll or not bother?
>>I'd
>> > >>say don't bother.
>> > >>
>> > >> - Gordon
>> > >>
>> > >> > On Oct 5, 2014, at 8:09 AM, "Christofer Dutz"
>> > >><ch...@c-ware.de> wrote:
>> > >> >
>> > >> > But in java this is not much different. Unless you explicitly
>>tell
>> > >>your Java VM to be strict, you can get a private constructor via
>> > >>Reflection, make this accesslible at runtime and instantiate it, no
>> > >>matter what the source-code says. Same with the type of generics.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > So I guess it would be a great addition to Flex to at least have
>> > >>features checked by the compiler, even if the runtime doesn't
>>enforce it.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Chris
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> > >> > Von: Gordon Smith [mailto:gsmithsf@hotmail.com]
>> > >> > Gesendet: Sonntag, 5. Oktober 2014 04:36
>> > >> > An: dev@flex.apache.org
>> > >> > Betreff: Re: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
>> > >> >
>> > >> > In general the ActionScript Virtual Machine enforces access
>>modifiers
>> > >>(so that, for example, something marked private is truly
>>inaccessible by
>> > >>any means outside the class) but I don't think the AVM enforces
>> > >>non-public constructors. I'm guessing that a constructor in the ABC
>>is
>> > >>public regardless of what the source code says, which would mean
>>that
>> > >>the constructor could be invoked by any code via reflection. If
>>this is
>> > >>the case, I'm not convinced we should pretend that constructors can
>>be
>> > >>non-public.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > - Gordon
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Sent from my iPad
>> > >> >
>> > >> >>> On Oct 4, 2014, at 4:14 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala"
>> > >><bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>> On Oct 4, 2014 12:55 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS"
>> > >><we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>> Hi,
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>> I started to check if it was possible to have private and
>>protected
>> > >> >> constructor in Falcon and I have to admit it was tricky
>>especially
>> > >> >> because I never seen a compiler from inside before but it is
>> > >> >> apparently possible, I've been able to compile successfully:
>> > >> >>> package myLib {
>> > >> >>> public class CTORTest {
>> > >> >>> private var _p:int;
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>> private function CTORTest(p:int) {
>> > >> >>> _p = p;
>> > >> >>> }
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>> private function anotherFct():CTORTest {
>> > >> >>> return new CTORTest(10);
>> > >> >>> }
>> > >> >>> }
>> > >> >>> }
>> > >> >>> and using the compiled lib:
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>> <?xml version="1.0"?>
>> > >> >>> <s:Application xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009"
>> > >> >> xmlns:s="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/spark"
>> > >> >> creationComplete="creationCompleteHandler(event)">
>> > >> >>> <fx:Script><![CDATA[
>> > >> >>> import mx.events.FlexEvent;
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>> import myLib.CTORTest;
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>> private function
>> > >>creationCompleteHandler(event:FlexEvent):void {
>> > >> >>> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
>> > >> >>> }
>> > >> >>> ]]></fx:Script>
>> > >> >>> </s:Application>
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>> gives:
>> > >> >>> [Fault] exception, information=VerifyError: Error #1014: La
>>classe
>> > >> >> myLib:CTORTest::CTORTest est introuvable. (not found) with the
>> > >>legacy
>> > >> >> compiler
>> > >> >>> and:
>> > >> >>> F:\sources\falconTestDrive\shell\src\Main.mxml:9
>> > >> >>> Erreur: Appel d'une méthode qui ne semble pas définie CTORTest.
>> > >>(Call
>> > >> >>> to
>> > >> >> a undefined method)
>> > >> >>> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>> (I will customize the error message later)
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>> I still need to check it works in the 3 possible ways to
>> > >>instantiate
>> > >> >>> a
>> > >> >> Class [1] (at the moment it works only with 1st one), check that
>> > >>works
>> > >> >> with is / instanceOf, revisit the cast function accordingly and
>> > >>maybe
>> > >> >> other things not yet in my mind and especially check FP won't
>> > >>complain using it.
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void),
>>new_type_name,
>> > >> >> ContainerID(expression*)) */
>> > >> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), expression,
>> > >> >> ContainerID(expression*)) */
>> > >> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void),
>>vector_literal,
>> > >> >> ContainerID(void)) */
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>> In case all this works and I'm far to know it at the moment, I
>>will
>> > >> >>> have
>> > >> >> to think about implement "method overloading" otherwise I can't
>>see
>> > >> >> any usage of a protected constructor and therefore will probably
>> > >> >> require some help for the best way to implement it.
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> Exciting to see these kind of experiments. A really good
>>usecase
>> > >>for
>> > >> >> private constructor would be to create a Singleton class, I.e a
>> > >>class
>> > >> >> that cannot be instantiated outside of itself. Would that be
>> > >> >> something you can test for?
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> Thanks,
>> > >> >> Om
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>> Thanks,
>> > >> >>> Frédéric THOMAS
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>>> From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
>> > >> >>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>> > >> >>>> Subject: RE: [Falcon] starting up
>> > >> >>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 16:57:28 +0100
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>> Ah ok, thanks Gordon, I was tearing my hair out :-)
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>> > >> >>>>
>> > >> >>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
>> > >> >>>>> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
>> > >> >>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 08:51:16 -0700
>> > >> >>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>> > >> >>>>>
>> > >> >>>>> That comment is out of date. Code Model was the part of
>>pre-Falcon
>> > >> >> Flash Builder that built an abstract syntax tree to support
>> > >> >> intelligent editing. We used it as the beginning of Falcon's
>>lexer
>> > >>and
>> > >> >> parser. The code is just looking at the AST to see if the
>> > >>constructor
>> > >> >> has a non-public namespace.
>> > >> >>>>>
>> > >> >>>>> - Gordon
>> > >> >>>>>
>> > >> >>>>>> On Oct 1, 2014, at 8:33 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <
>> > >> >> webdoublefx@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> > >> >>>>>>
>> > >> >>>>>>
>> > >> >>>>>>
>> > >> >>>>>>
>> > >> >>>>>>
>> > >> >>>>>>
>> > >> >>>>>>
>> > >> >>>>>> I updated it to v17.0 and check in
>> > >> >> falcon\compiler\generated\dist\sdk\lib\external, is there.
>> > >> >>>>>>
>> > >> >>>>>> oops, looking better, it has both, just removed the bad
>>one, it
>> > >> >> runs.
>> > >> >>>>>>
>> > >> >>>>>> Now, looking at
>> > >>internal\as\codegen\ClassDirectiveProcessor.java,
>> > >> >>>>>> I
>> > >> >> see that:
>> > >> >>>>>>
>> > >> >>>>>> // If a constructor has a namespace as part of it's
>>declaration,
>> > >> >>>>>> it
>> > >> >> must be declared public.
>> > >> >>>>>> // It is ok to omit the namespace
>> > >> >>>>>> // We must check the AST, as CM treats all ctors as public
>>no
>> > >> >> matter what the user typed in
>> > >> >>>>>> // so the FunctionDefinition will always be in the public
>> > >> >>>>>> namespace if( node.getActualNamespaceNode() != null &&
>> > >> >>>>>> node.getActualNamespaceNode().getName() !=
>> > >> >> IASKeywordConstants.PUBLIC)
>> > >> >>>>>> problems.add(new
>> > >> >> ConstructorMustBePublicProblem(node.getActualNamespaceNode()));
>> > >> >>>>>>
>> > >> >>>>>> What is the CM or Code Model ?
>> > >> >>>>>>
>> > >> >>>>>> Thanks,
>> > >> >>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>> > >> >>>>>>
>> > >> >>>>>>> From: aharui@adobe.com
>> > >> >>>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>> > >> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
>> > >> >>>>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 13:36:50 +0000
>> > >> >>>>>>>
>> > >> >>>>>>> Could you have an old guava.jar?
>> > >> >>>>>>>
>> > >> >>>>>>>> On 10/1/14 4:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS"
>><we...@hotmail.com>
>> > >> >> wrote:
>> > >> >>>>>>>>
>> > >> >>>>>>>> Hi,
>> > >> >>>>>>>>
>> > >> >>>>>>>> I built it with ANT an ran Falcon compc.bat from the
>> > >> >> generated/dist/sdk,
>> > >> >>>>>>>> does anyone knows why I get that ?
>> > >> >>>>>>>>
>> > >> >>>>>>>> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
>> > >> >>>>>>>> com/google/common/cache/CacheLoader
>> > >> >>>>>>>> at
>> > >> >>>>>>>>
>>org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.MXMLC.<init>(MXMLC.java:379)
>> > >> >>>>>>>> at
>>org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.<init>(COMPC.java:54)
>> > >> >>>>>>>> at
>> > >> >>
>> >
>>>>org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.staticMainNoExit(COMPC.java:75)
>> > >> >>>>>>>> at
>>org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.main(COMPC.java:63)
>> > >> >>>>>>>> Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
>> > >> >>>>>>>> com.google.common.cache.CacheLoader
>> > >> >>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)
>> > >> >>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)
>> > >> >>>>>>>> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native
>>Method)
>> > >> >>>>>>>> at
>>java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)
>> > >> >>>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:424)
>> > >> >>>>>>>> at
>> > >> >>>>>>>>
>>sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:308)
>> > >> >>>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
>> > >> >>>>>>>> ... 4 more
>> > >> >>>>>>>>
>> > >> >>>>>>>> Thanks,
>> > >> >>>>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>> > >> >>>
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
RE: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
Posted by Frédéric THOMAS <we...@hotmail.com>.
Actually, I guess I would find where and maybe how as I've seen it while I was debugging the constructor, at emit time, but would mean to generate "
internal class SecretToken {}" and that I've got no idea when and how.
Frédéric THOMAS
> From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> Subject: RE: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 23:27:58 +0100
>
> Hi Alex,
>
> > I have no idea what the right answer is, but I was wondering if you could
> > try to describe (in AS code) what scenarios you want to support and not
> > support. Is this just for Singletons or are there other use cases? And
> > what edge cases are allowed, if any?
>
> It is not only for the singleton, for examle, at some point, I would like to be able to do that:
> [Abstract]
> public class BaseClass {
>
> public static const INSTANCE:BaseClass = new BaseClass(11);
>
> private var _p:int;
>
> protected function BaseClass(p:int) {
> _p = p;
> }
>
> public function get p():int;
> }
> }
>
> ---
>
> // Error, p not implemented
> public class SubClass extends BaseClass {
>
> public function SubClass() {
> super(12);
> }
> }
>
> ---
> public class AnotherClass {
>
> public function AnotherClass() {
> const a:BaseClass = new BaseClass(13); // Error, can't instantiate a non public ctor.
> }
> }> Maybe some metadata can cause the compiler to generate different AS that
> > is sufficient for your needs. You could even change any call to the
> > constructor from within the Singleton source code to some other function
> > that initializes the single instance.
>
> Yes, I guess we could eventually generate some ABC code to simulate the behavior, just for now, I'm not sure when and how exactly to tell the compiler to generate that in case of private ctor, this in case of protected, I'm just discovering it but will continue to dig into.
>
> Frédéric THOMAS
>
> > From: aharui@adobe.com
> > To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> > Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 21:57:09 +0000
> >
> > Hi Fred,
> >
> > I have no idea what the right answer is, but I was wondering if you could
> > try to describe (in AS code) what scenarios you want to support and not
> > support. Is this just for Singletons or are there other use cases? And
> > what edge cases are allowed, if any?
> >
> > For example, if you have code like:
> >
> > var c:Class = MySingleton;
> > var instance:MySingleton = new c();
> >
> > what would you want to have happen? I¹d guess the compiler cannot check
> > it.
> >
> > Similarly, are there any AS Singleton patterns that are sufficient? Such
> > as:
> >
> > public class MySingleton
> > {
> > public function MySingleton(secretToken:SecretToken)
> > {
> > }
> > }
> > internal class SecretToken
> > {
> > }
> >
> > Maybe some metadata can cause the compiler to generate different AS that
> > is sufficient for your needs. You could even change any call to the
> > constructor from within the Singleton source code to some other function
> > that initializes the single instance.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Alex
> >
> >
> > On 10/6/14, 2:33 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Hi Gordon, Darrell, Alex,
> > >
> > >I've been able to work on it a bit tonight and realized that I was wrong,
> > >actually, I can get the right NS infos parsed and emitted but can't get
> > >it back thru the ABCParser.
> > >I've been confused because I didn't check the Qualifier NS but instead
> > >its kind which was 5 (private) as I wanted but it was actually the one of
> > >the CMImplicitNS (aka, invalid NS) and wasn,'t able to find in the chain
> > >where it has been forced as I thought having removed all the one
> > >implicated in defining a ctor NS, I wonder now if the fact that the ctor
> > >is not part of a trait is the cause ?
> > >
> > >Any way, I started to explore other possibilities, one of them is to pass
> > >the NS info via MetaTag as done for go_to_definition and use this info in
> > >the semantic checker as I can't at the time of the ABC Parsing, set the
> > >NS because the Metadata are checked after the methodbody and in more,
> > >I've got no info at this point about the super class except its name
> > >coming from InstanceInfo (or indirectly via IReference) but would like to
> > >think I can manage to use the MetaTag (like
> > >"[constructor(ns:'protected')] in the semantic checker, do you see any
> > >problem in doing so or if there's a better place and moment to do it
> > >except it could be erased by the optimiser ?
> > >
> > >The last possibility as I didn't see any drawback yet in debugging it in
> > >the emitter, is to pass the info directly in the name at FunctionNode
> > >construction time and either set the NS accordingly or use this info in
> > >the semantic checker, as far as I've debugged it (didn't to the test yet
> > >but followed all the emitter chain), I didn't see any problem that could
> > >be to emit it and don't think there are any in reading it either thru the
> > >ABCParser, I would pass for example pass "protected:MyConstructorName",
> > >tweak the FunctionNode:isConstructor accordingly and remove the
> > >CMImplitNS checks as I did until now, what do you think, do you see any
> > >problem with this approach ?
> > >
> > >More over if the latter appears to be a valid option, it could be used
> > >for the method overloading.
> > >
> > >Thanks,
> > >Frédéric THOMAS
> > >
> > >> Subject: Re: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> > >> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
> > >> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 09:24:14 -0700
> > >> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > >>
> > >> It's a bit different in that the AVM is strict about access modifiers;
> > >>you cannot use reflection to call a private method from outside its
> > >>class. However I know developers have wanted non-public constructors for
> > >>a long time and most won't care if they're not enforced at runtime, so I
> > >>don't object to the compiler enhancement. I just wanted to mention
> > >>something that folks should be aware of.
> > >>
> > >> Another thing to be aware of is that this mean there will be source
> > >>code that compiles under a Falcon that doesn't compile under the old
> > >>compiler. Would we change the old compiler as we'll or not bother? I'd
> > >>say don't bother.
> > >>
> > >> - Gordon
> > >>
> > >> > On Oct 5, 2014, at 8:09 AM, "Christofer Dutz"
> > >><ch...@c-ware.de> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > But in java this is not much different. Unless you explicitly tell
> > >>your Java VM to be strict, you can get a private constructor via
> > >>Reflection, make this accesslible at runtime and instantiate it, no
> > >>matter what the source-code says. Same with the type of generics.
> > >> >
> > >> > So I guess it would be a great addition to Flex to at least have
> > >>features checked by the compiler, even if the runtime doesn't enforce it.
> > >> >
> > >> > Chris
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > >> > Von: Gordon Smith [mailto:gsmithsf@hotmail.com]
> > >> > Gesendet: Sonntag, 5. Oktober 2014 04:36
> > >> > An: dev@flex.apache.org
> > >> > Betreff: Re: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> > >> >
> > >> > In general the ActionScript Virtual Machine enforces access modifiers
> > >>(so that, for example, something marked private is truly inaccessible by
> > >>any means outside the class) but I don't think the AVM enforces
> > >>non-public constructors. I'm guessing that a constructor in the ABC is
> > >>public regardless of what the source code says, which would mean that
> > >>the constructor could be invoked by any code via reflection. If this is
> > >>the case, I'm not convinced we should pretend that constructors can be
> > >>non-public.
> > >> >
> > >> > - Gordon
> > >> >
> > >> > Sent from my iPad
> > >> >
> > >> >>> On Oct 4, 2014, at 4:14 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala"
> > >><bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> On Oct 4, 2014 12:55 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS"
> > >><we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Hi,
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> I started to check if it was possible to have private and protected
> > >> >> constructor in Falcon and I have to admit it was tricky especially
> > >> >> because I never seen a compiler from inside before but it is
> > >> >> apparently possible, I've been able to compile successfully:
> > >> >>> package myLib {
> > >> >>> public class CTORTest {
> > >> >>> private var _p:int;
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> private function CTORTest(p:int) {
> > >> >>> _p = p;
> > >> >>> }
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> private function anotherFct():CTORTest {
> > >> >>> return new CTORTest(10);
> > >> >>> }
> > >> >>> }
> > >> >>> }
> > >> >>> and using the compiled lib:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> <?xml version="1.0"?>
> > >> >>> <s:Application xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009"
> > >> >> xmlns:s="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/spark"
> > >> >> creationComplete="creationCompleteHandler(event)">
> > >> >>> <fx:Script><![CDATA[
> > >> >>> import mx.events.FlexEvent;
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> import myLib.CTORTest;
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> private function
> > >>creationCompleteHandler(event:FlexEvent):void {
> > >> >>> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
> > >> >>> }
> > >> >>> ]]></fx:Script>
> > >> >>> </s:Application>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> gives:
> > >> >>> [Fault] exception, information=VerifyError: Error #1014: La classe
> > >> >> myLib:CTORTest::CTORTest est introuvable. (not found) with the
> > >>legacy
> > >> >> compiler
> > >> >>> and:
> > >> >>> F:\sources\falconTestDrive\shell\src\Main.mxml:9
> > >> >>> Erreur: Appel d'une méthode qui ne semble pas définie CTORTest.
> > >>(Call
> > >> >>> to
> > >> >> a undefined method)
> > >> >>> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> (I will customize the error message later)
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> I still need to check it works in the 3 possible ways to
> > >>instantiate
> > >> >>> a
> > >> >> Class [1] (at the moment it works only with 1st one), check that
> > >>works
> > >> >> with is / instanceOf, revisit the cast function accordingly and
> > >>maybe
> > >> >> other things not yet in my mind and especially check FP won't
> > >>complain using it.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), new_type_name,
> > >> >> ContainerID(expression*)) */
> > >> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), expression,
> > >> >> ContainerID(expression*)) */
> > >> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), vector_literal,
> > >> >> ContainerID(void)) */
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> In case all this works and I'm far to know it at the moment, I will
> > >> >>> have
> > >> >> to think about implement "method overloading" otherwise I can't see
> > >> >> any usage of a protected constructor and therefore will probably
> > >> >> require some help for the best way to implement it.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Exciting to see these kind of experiments. A really good usecase
> > >>for
> > >> >> private constructor would be to create a Singleton class, I.e a
> > >>class
> > >> >> that cannot be instantiated outside of itself. Would that be
> > >> >> something you can test for?
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Thanks,
> > >> >> Om
> > >> >>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Thanks,
> > >> >>> Frédéric THOMAS
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>> From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
> > >> >>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > >> >>>> Subject: RE: [Falcon] starting up
> > >> >>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 16:57:28 +0100
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Ah ok, thanks Gordon, I was tearing my hair out :-)
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> > >> >>>>> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
> > >> >>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 08:51:16 -0700
> > >> >>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> That comment is out of date. Code Model was the part of pre-Falcon
> > >> >> Flash Builder that built an abstract syntax tree to support
> > >> >> intelligent editing. We used it as the beginning of Falcon's lexer
> > >>and
> > >> >> parser. The code is just looking at the AST to see if the
> > >>constructor
> > >> >> has a non-public namespace.
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> - Gordon
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> On Oct 1, 2014, at 8:33 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <
> > >> >> webdoublefx@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> I updated it to v17.0 and check in
> > >> >> falcon\compiler\generated\dist\sdk\lib\external, is there.
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> oops, looking better, it has both, just removed the bad one, it
> > >> >> runs.
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> Now, looking at
> > >>internal\as\codegen\ClassDirectiveProcessor.java,
> > >> >>>>>> I
> > >> >> see that:
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> // If a constructor has a namespace as part of it's declaration,
> > >> >>>>>> it
> > >> >> must be declared public.
> > >> >>>>>> // It is ok to omit the namespace
> > >> >>>>>> // We must check the AST, as CM treats all ctors as public no
> > >> >> matter what the user typed in
> > >> >>>>>> // so the FunctionDefinition will always be in the public
> > >> >>>>>> namespace if( node.getActualNamespaceNode() != null &&
> > >> >>>>>> node.getActualNamespaceNode().getName() !=
> > >> >> IASKeywordConstants.PUBLIC)
> > >> >>>>>> problems.add(new
> > >> >> ConstructorMustBePublicProblem(node.getActualNamespaceNode()));
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> What is the CM or Code Model ?
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> Thanks,
> > >> >>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>> From: aharui@adobe.com
> > >> >>>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > >> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> > >> >>>>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 13:36:50 +0000
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>> Could you have an old guava.jar?
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> On 10/1/14 4:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com>
> > >> >> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> Hi,
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> I built it with ANT an ran Falcon compc.bat from the
> > >> >> generated/dist/sdk,
> > >> >>>>>>>> does anyone knows why I get that ?
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> > >> >>>>>>>> com/google/common/cache/CacheLoader
> > >> >>>>>>>> at
> > >> >>>>>>>> org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.MXMLC.<init>(MXMLC.java:379)
> > >> >>>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.<init>(COMPC.java:54)
> > >> >>>>>>>> at
> > >> >>
> > >>org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.staticMainNoExit(COMPC.java:75)
> > >> >>>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.main(COMPC.java:63)
> > >> >>>>>>>> Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
> > >> >>>>>>>> com.google.common.cache.CacheLoader
> > >> >>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)
> > >> >>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)
> > >> >>>>>>>> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
> > >> >>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)
> > >> >>>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:424)
> > >> >>>>>>>> at
> > >> >>>>>>>> sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:308)
> > >> >>>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
> > >> >>>>>>>> ... 4 more
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > >> >>>>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> > >> >>>
> > >
> > >
> >
>
RE: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
Posted by Frédéric THOMAS <we...@hotmail.com>.
Hi Alex,
> I have no idea what the right answer is, but I was wondering if you could
> try to describe (in AS code) what scenarios you want to support and not
> support. Is this just for Singletons or are there other use cases? And
> what edge cases are allowed, if any?
It is not only for the singleton, for examle, at some point, I would like to be able to do that:
[Abstract]
public class BaseClass {
public static const INSTANCE:BaseClass = new BaseClass(11);
private var _p:int;
protected function BaseClass(p:int) {
_p = p;
}
public function get p():int;
}
}
---
// Error, p not implemented
public class SubClass extends BaseClass {
public function SubClass() {
super(12);
}
}
---
public class AnotherClass {
public function AnotherClass() {
const a:BaseClass = new BaseClass(13); // Error, can't instantiate a non public ctor.
}
}> Maybe some metadata can cause the compiler to generate different AS that
> is sufficient for your needs. You could even change any call to the
> constructor from within the Singleton source code to some other function
> that initializes the single instance.
Yes, I guess we could eventually generate some ABC code to simulate the behavior, just for now, I'm not sure when and how exactly to tell the compiler to generate that in case of private ctor, this in case of protected, I'm just discovering it but will continue to dig into.
Frédéric THOMAS
> From: aharui@adobe.com
> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> Subject: Re: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 21:57:09 +0000
>
> Hi Fred,
>
> I have no idea what the right answer is, but I was wondering if you could
> try to describe (in AS code) what scenarios you want to support and not
> support. Is this just for Singletons or are there other use cases? And
> what edge cases are allowed, if any?
>
> For example, if you have code like:
>
> var c:Class = MySingleton;
> var instance:MySingleton = new c();
>
> what would you want to have happen? I¹d guess the compiler cannot check
> it.
>
> Similarly, are there any AS Singleton patterns that are sufficient? Such
> as:
>
> public class MySingleton
> {
> public function MySingleton(secretToken:SecretToken)
> {
> }
> }
> internal class SecretToken
> {
> }
>
> Maybe some metadata can cause the compiler to generate different AS that
> is sufficient for your needs. You could even change any call to the
> constructor from within the Singleton source code to some other function
> that initializes the single instance.
>
> Thanks,
> -Alex
>
>
> On 10/6/14, 2:33 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> >Hi Gordon, Darrell, Alex,
> >
> >I've been able to work on it a bit tonight and realized that I was wrong,
> >actually, I can get the right NS infos parsed and emitted but can't get
> >it back thru the ABCParser.
> >I've been confused because I didn't check the Qualifier NS but instead
> >its kind which was 5 (private) as I wanted but it was actually the one of
> >the CMImplicitNS (aka, invalid NS) and wasn,'t able to find in the chain
> >where it has been forced as I thought having removed all the one
> >implicated in defining a ctor NS, I wonder now if the fact that the ctor
> >is not part of a trait is the cause ?
> >
> >Any way, I started to explore other possibilities, one of them is to pass
> >the NS info via MetaTag as done for go_to_definition and use this info in
> >the semantic checker as I can't at the time of the ABC Parsing, set the
> >NS because the Metadata are checked after the methodbody and in more,
> >I've got no info at this point about the super class except its name
> >coming from InstanceInfo (or indirectly via IReference) but would like to
> >think I can manage to use the MetaTag (like
> >"[constructor(ns:'protected')] in the semantic checker, do you see any
> >problem in doing so or if there's a better place and moment to do it
> >except it could be erased by the optimiser ?
> >
> >The last possibility as I didn't see any drawback yet in debugging it in
> >the emitter, is to pass the info directly in the name at FunctionNode
> >construction time and either set the NS accordingly or use this info in
> >the semantic checker, as far as I've debugged it (didn't to the test yet
> >but followed all the emitter chain), I didn't see any problem that could
> >be to emit it and don't think there are any in reading it either thru the
> >ABCParser, I would pass for example pass "protected:MyConstructorName",
> >tweak the FunctionNode:isConstructor accordingly and remove the
> >CMImplitNS checks as I did until now, what do you think, do you see any
> >problem with this approach ?
> >
> >More over if the latter appears to be a valid option, it could be used
> >for the method overloading.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Frédéric THOMAS
> >
> >> Subject: Re: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> >> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
> >> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 09:24:14 -0700
> >> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >>
> >> It's a bit different in that the AVM is strict about access modifiers;
> >>you cannot use reflection to call a private method from outside its
> >>class. However I know developers have wanted non-public constructors for
> >>a long time and most won't care if they're not enforced at runtime, so I
> >>don't object to the compiler enhancement. I just wanted to mention
> >>something that folks should be aware of.
> >>
> >> Another thing to be aware of is that this mean there will be source
> >>code that compiles under a Falcon that doesn't compile under the old
> >>compiler. Would we change the old compiler as we'll or not bother? I'd
> >>say don't bother.
> >>
> >> - Gordon
> >>
> >> > On Oct 5, 2014, at 8:09 AM, "Christofer Dutz"
> >><ch...@c-ware.de> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > But in java this is not much different. Unless you explicitly tell
> >>your Java VM to be strict, you can get a private constructor via
> >>Reflection, make this accesslible at runtime and instantiate it, no
> >>matter what the source-code says. Same with the type of generics.
> >> >
> >> > So I guess it would be a great addition to Flex to at least have
> >>features checked by the compiler, even if the runtime doesn't enforce it.
> >> >
> >> > Chris
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> >> > Von: Gordon Smith [mailto:gsmithsf@hotmail.com]
> >> > Gesendet: Sonntag, 5. Oktober 2014 04:36
> >> > An: dev@flex.apache.org
> >> > Betreff: Re: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> >> >
> >> > In general the ActionScript Virtual Machine enforces access modifiers
> >>(so that, for example, something marked private is truly inaccessible by
> >>any means outside the class) but I don't think the AVM enforces
> >>non-public constructors. I'm guessing that a constructor in the ABC is
> >>public regardless of what the source code says, which would mean that
> >>the constructor could be invoked by any code via reflection. If this is
> >>the case, I'm not convinced we should pretend that constructors can be
> >>non-public.
> >> >
> >> > - Gordon
> >> >
> >> > Sent from my iPad
> >> >
> >> >>> On Oct 4, 2014, at 4:14 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala"
> >><bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Oct 4, 2014 12:55 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS"
> >><we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Hi,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I started to check if it was possible to have private and protected
> >> >> constructor in Falcon and I have to admit it was tricky especially
> >> >> because I never seen a compiler from inside before but it is
> >> >> apparently possible, I've been able to compile successfully:
> >> >>> package myLib {
> >> >>> public class CTORTest {
> >> >>> private var _p:int;
> >> >>>
> >> >>> private function CTORTest(p:int) {
> >> >>> _p = p;
> >> >>> }
> >> >>>
> >> >>> private function anotherFct():CTORTest {
> >> >>> return new CTORTest(10);
> >> >>> }
> >> >>> }
> >> >>> }
> >> >>> and using the compiled lib:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> <?xml version="1.0"?>
> >> >>> <s:Application xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009"
> >> >> xmlns:s="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/spark"
> >> >> creationComplete="creationCompleteHandler(event)">
> >> >>> <fx:Script><![CDATA[
> >> >>> import mx.events.FlexEvent;
> >> >>>
> >> >>> import myLib.CTORTest;
> >> >>>
> >> >>> private function
> >>creationCompleteHandler(event:FlexEvent):void {
> >> >>> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
> >> >>> }
> >> >>> ]]></fx:Script>
> >> >>> </s:Application>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> gives:
> >> >>> [Fault] exception, information=VerifyError: Error #1014: La classe
> >> >> myLib:CTORTest::CTORTest est introuvable. (not found) with the
> >>legacy
> >> >> compiler
> >> >>> and:
> >> >>> F:\sources\falconTestDrive\shell\src\Main.mxml:9
> >> >>> Erreur: Appel d'une méthode qui ne semble pas définie CTORTest.
> >>(Call
> >> >>> to
> >> >> a undefined method)
> >> >>> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
> >> >>>
> >> >>> (I will customize the error message later)
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I still need to check it works in the 3 possible ways to
> >>instantiate
> >> >>> a
> >> >> Class [1] (at the moment it works only with 1st one), check that
> >>works
> >> >> with is / instanceOf, revisit the cast function accordingly and
> >>maybe
> >> >> other things not yet in my mind and especially check FP won't
> >>complain using it.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), new_type_name,
> >> >> ContainerID(expression*)) */
> >> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), expression,
> >> >> ContainerID(expression*)) */
> >> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), vector_literal,
> >> >> ContainerID(void)) */
> >> >>>
> >> >>> In case all this works and I'm far to know it at the moment, I will
> >> >>> have
> >> >> to think about implement "method overloading" otherwise I can't see
> >> >> any usage of a protected constructor and therefore will probably
> >> >> require some help for the best way to implement it.
> >> >>
> >> >> Exciting to see these kind of experiments. A really good usecase
> >>for
> >> >> private constructor would be to create a Singleton class, I.e a
> >>class
> >> >> that cannot be instantiated outside of itself. Would that be
> >> >> something you can test for?
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> Om
> >> >>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Thanks,
> >> >>> Frédéric THOMAS
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
> >> >>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >> >>>> Subject: RE: [Falcon] starting up
> >> >>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 16:57:28 +0100
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Ah ok, thanks Gordon, I was tearing my hair out :-)
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> >> >>>>> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
> >> >>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 08:51:16 -0700
> >> >>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> That comment is out of date. Code Model was the part of pre-Falcon
> >> >> Flash Builder that built an abstract syntax tree to support
> >> >> intelligent editing. We used it as the beginning of Falcon's lexer
> >>and
> >> >> parser. The code is just looking at the AST to see if the
> >>constructor
> >> >> has a non-public namespace.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> - Gordon
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> On Oct 1, 2014, at 8:33 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <
> >> >> webdoublefx@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> I updated it to v17.0 and check in
> >> >> falcon\compiler\generated\dist\sdk\lib\external, is there.
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> oops, looking better, it has both, just removed the bad one, it
> >> >> runs.
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Now, looking at
> >>internal\as\codegen\ClassDirectiveProcessor.java,
> >> >>>>>> I
> >> >> see that:
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> // If a constructor has a namespace as part of it's declaration,
> >> >>>>>> it
> >> >> must be declared public.
> >> >>>>>> // It is ok to omit the namespace
> >> >>>>>> // We must check the AST, as CM treats all ctors as public no
> >> >> matter what the user typed in
> >> >>>>>> // so the FunctionDefinition will always be in the public
> >> >>>>>> namespace if( node.getActualNamespaceNode() != null &&
> >> >>>>>> node.getActualNamespaceNode().getName() !=
> >> >> IASKeywordConstants.PUBLIC)
> >> >>>>>> problems.add(new
> >> >> ConstructorMustBePublicProblem(node.getActualNamespaceNode()));
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> What is the CM or Code Model ?
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Thanks,
> >> >>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> From: aharui@adobe.com
> >> >>>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> >> >>>>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 13:36:50 +0000
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> Could you have an old guava.jar?
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> On 10/1/14 4:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Hi,
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> I built it with ANT an ran Falcon compc.bat from the
> >> >> generated/dist/sdk,
> >> >>>>>>>> does anyone knows why I get that ?
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> >> >>>>>>>> com/google/common/cache/CacheLoader
> >> >>>>>>>> at
> >> >>>>>>>> org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.MXMLC.<init>(MXMLC.java:379)
> >> >>>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.<init>(COMPC.java:54)
> >> >>>>>>>> at
> >> >>
> >>org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.staticMainNoExit(COMPC.java:75)
> >> >>>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.main(COMPC.java:63)
> >> >>>>>>>> Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
> >> >>>>>>>> com.google.common.cache.CacheLoader
> >> >>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)
> >> >>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)
> >> >>>>>>>> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
> >> >>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)
> >> >>>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:424)
> >> >>>>>>>> at
> >> >>>>>>>> sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:308)
> >> >>>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
> >> >>>>>>>> ... 4 more
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >> >>>>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> >> >>>
> >
> >
>
Re: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
Hi Fred,
I have no idea what the right answer is, but I was wondering if you could
try to describe (in AS code) what scenarios you want to support and not
support. Is this just for Singletons or are there other use cases? And
what edge cases are allowed, if any?
For example, if you have code like:
var c:Class = MySingleton;
var instance:MySingleton = new c();
what would you want to have happen? I¹d guess the compiler cannot check
it.
Similarly, are there any AS Singleton patterns that are sufficient? Such
as:
public class MySingleton
{
public function MySingleton(secretToken:SecretToken)
{
}
}
internal class SecretToken
{
}
Maybe some metadata can cause the compiler to generate different AS that
is sufficient for your needs. You could even change any call to the
constructor from within the Singleton source code to some other function
that initializes the single instance.
Thanks,
-Alex
On 10/6/14, 2:33 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>Hi Gordon, Darrell, Alex,
>
>I've been able to work on it a bit tonight and realized that I was wrong,
>actually, I can get the right NS infos parsed and emitted but can't get
>it back thru the ABCParser.
>I've been confused because I didn't check the Qualifier NS but instead
>its kind which was 5 (private) as I wanted but it was actually the one of
>the CMImplicitNS (aka, invalid NS) and wasn,'t able to find in the chain
>where it has been forced as I thought having removed all the one
>implicated in defining a ctor NS, I wonder now if the fact that the ctor
>is not part of a trait is the cause ?
>
>Any way, I started to explore other possibilities, one of them is to pass
>the NS info via MetaTag as done for go_to_definition and use this info in
>the semantic checker as I can't at the time of the ABC Parsing, set the
>NS because the Metadata are checked after the methodbody and in more,
>I've got no info at this point about the super class except its name
>coming from InstanceInfo (or indirectly via IReference) but would like to
>think I can manage to use the MetaTag (like
>"[constructor(ns:'protected')] in the semantic checker, do you see any
>problem in doing so or if there's a better place and moment to do it
>except it could be erased by the optimiser ?
>
>The last possibility as I didn't see any drawback yet in debugging it in
>the emitter, is to pass the info directly in the name at FunctionNode
>construction time and either set the NS accordingly or use this info in
>the semantic checker, as far as I've debugged it (didn't to the test yet
>but followed all the emitter chain), I didn't see any problem that could
>be to emit it and don't think there are any in reading it either thru the
>ABCParser, I would pass for example pass "protected:MyConstructorName",
>tweak the FunctionNode:isConstructor accordingly and remove the
>CMImplitNS checks as I did until now, what do you think, do you see any
>problem with this approach ?
>
>More over if the latter appears to be a valid option, it could be used
>for the method overloading.
>
>Thanks,
>Frédéric THOMAS
>
>> Subject: Re: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
>> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
>> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 09:24:14 -0700
>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>>
>> It's a bit different in that the AVM is strict about access modifiers;
>>you cannot use reflection to call a private method from outside its
>>class. However I know developers have wanted non-public constructors for
>>a long time and most won't care if they're not enforced at runtime, so I
>>don't object to the compiler enhancement. I just wanted to mention
>>something that folks should be aware of.
>>
>> Another thing to be aware of is that this mean there will be source
>>code that compiles under a Falcon that doesn't compile under the old
>>compiler. Would we change the old compiler as we'll or not bother? I'd
>>say don't bother.
>>
>> - Gordon
>>
>> > On Oct 5, 2014, at 8:09 AM, "Christofer Dutz"
>><ch...@c-ware.de> wrote:
>> >
>> > But in java this is not much different. Unless you explicitly tell
>>your Java VM to be strict, you can get a private constructor via
>>Reflection, make this accesslible at runtime and instantiate it, no
>>matter what the source-code says. Same with the type of generics.
>> >
>> > So I guess it would be a great addition to Flex to at least have
>>features checked by the compiler, even if the runtime doesn't enforce it.
>> >
>> > Chris
>> >
>> >
>> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> > Von: Gordon Smith [mailto:gsmithsf@hotmail.com]
>> > Gesendet: Sonntag, 5. Oktober 2014 04:36
>> > An: dev@flex.apache.org
>> > Betreff: Re: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
>> >
>> > In general the ActionScript Virtual Machine enforces access modifiers
>>(so that, for example, something marked private is truly inaccessible by
>>any means outside the class) but I don't think the AVM enforces
>>non-public constructors. I'm guessing that a constructor in the ABC is
>>public regardless of what the source code says, which would mean that
>>the constructor could be invoked by any code via reflection. If this is
>>the case, I'm not convinced we should pretend that constructors can be
>>non-public.
>> >
>> > - Gordon
>> >
>> > Sent from my iPad
>> >
>> >>> On Oct 4, 2014, at 4:14 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala"
>><bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> On Oct 4, 2014 12:55 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS"
>><we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Hi,
>> >>>
>> >>> I started to check if it was possible to have private and protected
>> >> constructor in Falcon and I have to admit it was tricky especially
>> >> because I never seen a compiler from inside before but it is
>> >> apparently possible, I've been able to compile successfully:
>> >>> package myLib {
>> >>> public class CTORTest {
>> >>> private var _p:int;
>> >>>
>> >>> private function CTORTest(p:int) {
>> >>> _p = p;
>> >>> }
>> >>>
>> >>> private function anotherFct():CTORTest {
>> >>> return new CTORTest(10);
>> >>> }
>> >>> }
>> >>> }
>> >>> and using the compiled lib:
>> >>>
>> >>> <?xml version="1.0"?>
>> >>> <s:Application xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009"
>> >> xmlns:s="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/spark"
>> >> creationComplete="creationCompleteHandler(event)">
>> >>> <fx:Script><![CDATA[
>> >>> import mx.events.FlexEvent;
>> >>>
>> >>> import myLib.CTORTest;
>> >>>
>> >>> private function
>>creationCompleteHandler(event:FlexEvent):void {
>> >>> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
>> >>> }
>> >>> ]]></fx:Script>
>> >>> </s:Application>
>> >>>
>> >>> gives:
>> >>> [Fault] exception, information=VerifyError: Error #1014: La classe
>> >> myLib:CTORTest::CTORTest est introuvable. (not found) with the
>>legacy
>> >> compiler
>> >>> and:
>> >>> F:\sources\falconTestDrive\shell\src\Main.mxml:9
>> >>> Erreur: Appel d'une méthode qui ne semble pas définie CTORTest.
>>(Call
>> >>> to
>> >> a undefined method)
>> >>> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
>> >>>
>> >>> (I will customize the error message later)
>> >>>
>> >>> I still need to check it works in the 3 possible ways to
>>instantiate
>> >>> a
>> >> Class [1] (at the moment it works only with 1st one), check that
>>works
>> >> with is / instanceOf, revisit the cast function accordingly and
>>maybe
>> >> other things not yet in my mind and especially check FP won't
>>complain using it.
>> >>>
>> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), new_type_name,
>> >> ContainerID(expression*)) */
>> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), expression,
>> >> ContainerID(expression*)) */
>> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), vector_literal,
>> >> ContainerID(void)) */
>> >>>
>> >>> In case all this works and I'm far to know it at the moment, I will
>> >>> have
>> >> to think about implement "method overloading" otherwise I can't see
>> >> any usage of a protected constructor and therefore will probably
>> >> require some help for the best way to implement it.
>> >>
>> >> Exciting to see these kind of experiments. A really good usecase
>>for
>> >> private constructor would be to create a Singleton class, I.e a
>>class
>> >> that cannot be instantiated outside of itself. Would that be
>> >> something you can test for?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Om
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks,
>> >>> Frédéric THOMAS
>> >>>
>> >>>> From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
>> >>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>> >>>> Subject: RE: [Falcon] starting up
>> >>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 16:57:28 +0100
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Ah ok, thanks Gordon, I was tearing my hair out :-)
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
>> >>>>> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
>> >>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 08:51:16 -0700
>> >>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> That comment is out of date. Code Model was the part of pre-Falcon
>> >> Flash Builder that built an abstract syntax tree to support
>> >> intelligent editing. We used it as the beginning of Falcon's lexer
>>and
>> >> parser. The code is just looking at the AST to see if the
>>constructor
>> >> has a non-public namespace.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> - Gordon
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Oct 1, 2014, at 8:33 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <
>> >> webdoublefx@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> I updated it to v17.0 and check in
>> >> falcon\compiler\generated\dist\sdk\lib\external, is there.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> oops, looking better, it has both, just removed the bad one, it
>> >> runs.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Now, looking at
>>internal\as\codegen\ClassDirectiveProcessor.java,
>> >>>>>> I
>> >> see that:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> // If a constructor has a namespace as part of it's declaration,
>> >>>>>> it
>> >> must be declared public.
>> >>>>>> // It is ok to omit the namespace
>> >>>>>> // We must check the AST, as CM treats all ctors as public no
>> >> matter what the user typed in
>> >>>>>> // so the FunctionDefinition will always be in the public
>> >>>>>> namespace if( node.getActualNamespaceNode() != null &&
>> >>>>>> node.getActualNamespaceNode().getName() !=
>> >> IASKeywordConstants.PUBLIC)
>> >>>>>> problems.add(new
>> >> ConstructorMustBePublicProblem(node.getActualNamespaceNode()));
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> What is the CM or Code Model ?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Thanks,
>> >>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> From: aharui@adobe.com
>> >>>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
>> >>>>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 13:36:50 +0000
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Could you have an old guava.jar?
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On 10/1/14 4:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Hi,
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> I built it with ANT an ran Falcon compc.bat from the
>> >> generated/dist/sdk,
>> >>>>>>>> does anyone knows why I get that ?
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
>> >>>>>>>> com/google/common/cache/CacheLoader
>> >>>>>>>> at
>> >>>>>>>> org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.MXMLC.<init>(MXMLC.java:379)
>> >>>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.<init>(COMPC.java:54)
>> >>>>>>>> at
>> >>
>>org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.staticMainNoExit(COMPC.java:75)
>> >>>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.main(COMPC.java:63)
>> >>>>>>>> Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
>> >>>>>>>> com.google.common.cache.CacheLoader
>> >>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)
>> >>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)
>> >>>>>>>> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
>> >>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)
>> >>>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:424)
>> >>>>>>>> at
>> >>>>>>>> sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:308)
>> >>>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
>> >>>>>>>> ... 4 more
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Thanks,
>> >>>>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>> >>>
>
>
RE: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
Posted by Frédéric THOMAS <we...@hotmail.com>.
Hi Gordon, Darrell, Alex,
I've been able to work on it a bit tonight and realized that I was wrong, actually, I can get the right NS infos parsed and emitted but can't get it back thru the ABCParser.
I've been confused because I didn't check the Qualifier NS but instead its kind which was 5 (private) as I wanted but it was actually the one of the CMImplicitNS (aka, invalid NS) and wasn,'t able to find in the chain where it has been forced as I thought having removed all the one implicated in defining a ctor NS, I wonder now if the fact that the ctor is not part of a trait is the cause ?
Any way, I started to explore other possibilities, one of them is to pass the NS info via MetaTag as done for go_to_definition and use this info in the semantic checker as I can't at the time of the ABC Parsing, set the NS because the Metadata are checked after the methodbody and in more, I've got no info at this point about the super class except its name coming from InstanceInfo (or indirectly via IReference) but would like to think I can manage to use the MetaTag (like "[constructor(ns:'protected')] in the semantic checker, do you see any problem in doing so or if there's a better place and moment to do it except it could be erased by the optimiser ?
The last possibility as I didn't see any drawback yet in debugging it in the emitter, is to pass the info directly in the name at FunctionNode construction time and either set the NS accordingly or use this info in the semantic checker, as far as I've debugged it (didn't to the test yet but followed all the emitter chain), I didn't see any problem that could be to emit it and don't think there are any in reading it either thru the ABCParser, I would pass for example pass "protected:MyConstructorName", tweak the FunctionNode:isConstructor accordingly and remove the CMImplitNS checks as I did until now, what do you think, do you see any problem with this approach ?
More over if the latter appears to be a valid option, it could be used for the method overloading.
Thanks,
Frédéric THOMAS
> Subject: Re: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 09:24:14 -0700
> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>
> It's a bit different in that the AVM is strict about access modifiers; you cannot use reflection to call a private method from outside its class. However I know developers have wanted non-public constructors for a long time and most won't care if they're not enforced at runtime, so I don't object to the compiler enhancement. I just wanted to mention something that folks should be aware of.
>
> Another thing to be aware of is that this mean there will be source code that compiles under a Falcon that doesn't compile under the old compiler. Would we change the old compiler as we'll or not bother? I'd say don't bother.
>
> - Gordon
>
> > On Oct 5, 2014, at 8:09 AM, "Christofer Dutz" <ch...@c-ware.de> wrote:
> >
> > But in java this is not much different. Unless you explicitly tell your Java VM to be strict, you can get a private constructor via Reflection, make this accesslible at runtime and instantiate it, no matter what the source-code says. Same with the type of generics.
> >
> > So I guess it would be a great addition to Flex to at least have features checked by the compiler, even if the runtime doesn't enforce it.
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: Gordon Smith [mailto:gsmithsf@hotmail.com]
> > Gesendet: Sonntag, 5. Oktober 2014 04:36
> > An: dev@flex.apache.org
> > Betreff: Re: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> >
> > In general the ActionScript Virtual Machine enforces access modifiers (so that, for example, something marked private is truly inaccessible by any means outside the class) but I don't think the AVM enforces non-public constructors. I'm guessing that a constructor in the ABC is public regardless of what the source code says, which would mean that the constructor could be invoked by any code via reflection. If this is the case, I'm not convinced we should pretend that constructors can be non-public.
> >
> > - Gordon
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> >>> On Oct 4, 2014, at 4:14 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Oct 4, 2014 12:55 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I started to check if it was possible to have private and protected
> >> constructor in Falcon and I have to admit it was tricky especially
> >> because I never seen a compiler from inside before but it is
> >> apparently possible, I've been able to compile successfully:
> >>> package myLib {
> >>> public class CTORTest {
> >>> private var _p:int;
> >>>
> >>> private function CTORTest(p:int) {
> >>> _p = p;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> private function anotherFct():CTORTest {
> >>> return new CTORTest(10);
> >>> }
> >>> }
> >>> }
> >>> and using the compiled lib:
> >>>
> >>> <?xml version="1.0"?>
> >>> <s:Application xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009"
> >> xmlns:s="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/spark"
> >> creationComplete="creationCompleteHandler(event)">
> >>> <fx:Script><![CDATA[
> >>> import mx.events.FlexEvent;
> >>>
> >>> import myLib.CTORTest;
> >>>
> >>> private function creationCompleteHandler(event:FlexEvent):void {
> >>> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
> >>> }
> >>> ]]></fx:Script>
> >>> </s:Application>
> >>>
> >>> gives:
> >>> [Fault] exception, information=VerifyError: Error #1014: La classe
> >> myLib:CTORTest::CTORTest est introuvable. (not found) with the legacy
> >> compiler
> >>> and:
> >>> F:\sources\falconTestDrive\shell\src\Main.mxml:9
> >>> Erreur: Appel d'une méthode qui ne semble pas définie CTORTest. (Call
> >>> to
> >> a undefined method)
> >>> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
> >>>
> >>> (I will customize the error message later)
> >>>
> >>> I still need to check it works in the 3 possible ways to instantiate
> >>> a
> >> Class [1] (at the moment it works only with 1st one), check that works
> >> with is / instanceOf, revisit the cast function accordingly and maybe
> >> other things not yet in my mind and especially check FP won't complain using it.
> >>>
> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), new_type_name,
> >> ContainerID(expression*)) */
> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), expression,
> >> ContainerID(expression*)) */
> >>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), vector_literal,
> >> ContainerID(void)) */
> >>>
> >>> In case all this works and I'm far to know it at the moment, I will
> >>> have
> >> to think about implement "method overloading" otherwise I can't see
> >> any usage of a protected constructor and therefore will probably
> >> require some help for the best way to implement it.
> >>
> >> Exciting to see these kind of experiments. A really good usecase for
> >> private constructor would be to create a Singleton class, I.e a class
> >> that cannot be instantiated outside of itself. Would that be
> >> something you can test for?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Om
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Frédéric THOMAS
> >>>
> >>>> From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
> >>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >>>> Subject: RE: [Falcon] starting up
> >>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 16:57:28 +0100
> >>>>
> >>>> Ah ok, thanks Gordon, I was tearing my hair out :-)
> >>>>
> >>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> >>>>
> >>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> >>>>> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
> >>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 08:51:16 -0700
> >>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That comment is out of date. Code Model was the part of pre-Falcon
> >> Flash Builder that built an abstract syntax tree to support
> >> intelligent editing. We used it as the beginning of Falcon's lexer and
> >> parser. The code is just looking at the AST to see if the constructor
> >> has a non-public namespace.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> - Gordon
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Oct 1, 2014, at 8:33 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <
> >> webdoublefx@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I updated it to v17.0 and check in
> >> falcon\compiler\generated\dist\sdk\lib\external, is there.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> oops, looking better, it has both, just removed the bad one, it
> >> runs.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Now, looking at internal\as\codegen\ClassDirectiveProcessor.java,
> >>>>>> I
> >> see that:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> // If a constructor has a namespace as part of it's declaration,
> >>>>>> it
> >> must be declared public.
> >>>>>> // It is ok to omit the namespace
> >>>>>> // We must check the AST, as CM treats all ctors as public no
> >> matter what the user typed in
> >>>>>> // so the FunctionDefinition will always be in the public
> >>>>>> namespace if( node.getActualNamespaceNode() != null &&
> >>>>>> node.getActualNamespaceNode().getName() !=
> >> IASKeywordConstants.PUBLIC)
> >>>>>> problems.add(new
> >> ConstructorMustBePublicProblem(node.getActualNamespaceNode()));
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> What is the CM or Code Model ?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> From: aharui@adobe.com
> >>>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> >>>>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 13:36:50 +0000
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Could you have an old guava.jar?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 10/1/14 4:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I built it with ANT an ran Falcon compc.bat from the
> >> generated/dist/sdk,
> >>>>>>>> does anyone knows why I get that ?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> >>>>>>>> com/google/common/cache/CacheLoader
> >>>>>>>> at
> >>>>>>>> org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.MXMLC.<init>(MXMLC.java:379)
> >>>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.<init>(COMPC.java:54)
> >>>>>>>> at
> >> org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.staticMainNoExit(COMPC.java:75)
> >>>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.main(COMPC.java:63)
> >>>>>>>> Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
> >>>>>>>> com.google.common.cache.CacheLoader
> >>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)
> >>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)
> >>>>>>>> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
> >>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)
> >>>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:424)
> >>>>>>>> at
> >>>>>>>> sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:308)
> >>>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
> >>>>>>>> ... 4 more
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> >>>
Re: AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
Posted by Gordon Smith <gs...@hotmail.com>.
It's a bit different in that the AVM is strict about access modifiers; you cannot use reflection to call a private method from outside its class. However I know developers have wanted non-public constructors for a long time and most won't care if they're not enforced at runtime, so I don't object to the compiler enhancement. I just wanted to mention something that folks should be aware of.
Another thing to be aware of is that this mean there will be source code that compiles under a Falcon that doesn't compile under the old compiler. Would we change the old compiler as we'll or not bother? I'd say don't bother.
- Gordon
> On Oct 5, 2014, at 8:09 AM, "Christofer Dutz" <ch...@c-ware.de> wrote:
>
> But in java this is not much different. Unless you explicitly tell your Java VM to be strict, you can get a private constructor via Reflection, make this accesslible at runtime and instantiate it, no matter what the source-code says. Same with the type of generics.
>
> So I guess it would be a great addition to Flex to at least have features checked by the compiler, even if the runtime doesn't enforce it.
>
> Chris
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Gordon Smith [mailto:gsmithsf@hotmail.com]
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 5. Oktober 2014 04:36
> An: dev@flex.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
>
> In general the ActionScript Virtual Machine enforces access modifiers (so that, for example, something marked private is truly inaccessible by any means outside the class) but I don't think the AVM enforces non-public constructors. I'm guessing that a constructor in the ABC is public regardless of what the source code says, which would mean that the constructor could be invoked by any code via reflection. If this is the case, I'm not convinced we should pretend that constructors can be non-public.
>
> - Gordon
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>>> On Oct 4, 2014, at 4:14 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Oct 4, 2014 12:55 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I started to check if it was possible to have private and protected
>> constructor in Falcon and I have to admit it was tricky especially
>> because I never seen a compiler from inside before but it is
>> apparently possible, I've been able to compile successfully:
>>> package myLib {
>>> public class CTORTest {
>>> private var _p:int;
>>>
>>> private function CTORTest(p:int) {
>>> _p = p;
>>> }
>>>
>>> private function anotherFct():CTORTest {
>>> return new CTORTest(10);
>>> }
>>> }
>>> }
>>> and using the compiled lib:
>>>
>>> <?xml version="1.0"?>
>>> <s:Application xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009"
>> xmlns:s="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/spark"
>> creationComplete="creationCompleteHandler(event)">
>>> <fx:Script><![CDATA[
>>> import mx.events.FlexEvent;
>>>
>>> import myLib.CTORTest;
>>>
>>> private function creationCompleteHandler(event:FlexEvent):void {
>>> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
>>> }
>>> ]]></fx:Script>
>>> </s:Application>
>>>
>>> gives:
>>> [Fault] exception, information=VerifyError: Error #1014: La classe
>> myLib:CTORTest::CTORTest est introuvable. (not found) with the legacy
>> compiler
>>> and:
>>> F:\sources\falconTestDrive\shell\src\Main.mxml:9
>>> Erreur: Appel d'une méthode qui ne semble pas définie CTORTest. (Call
>>> to
>> a undefined method)
>>> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
>>>
>>> (I will customize the error message later)
>>>
>>> I still need to check it works in the 3 possible ways to instantiate
>>> a
>> Class [1] (at the moment it works only with 1st one), check that works
>> with is / instanceOf, revisit the cast function accordingly and maybe
>> other things not yet in my mind and especially check FP won't complain using it.
>>>
>>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), new_type_name,
>> ContainerID(expression*)) */
>>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), expression,
>> ContainerID(expression*)) */
>>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), vector_literal,
>> ContainerID(void)) */
>>>
>>> In case all this works and I'm far to know it at the moment, I will
>>> have
>> to think about implement "method overloading" otherwise I can't see
>> any usage of a protected constructor and therefore will probably
>> require some help for the best way to implement it.
>>
>> Exciting to see these kind of experiments. A really good usecase for
>> private constructor would be to create a Singleton class, I.e a class
>> that cannot be instantiated outside of itself. Would that be
>> something you can test for?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Om
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>>>
>>>> From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>>>> Subject: RE: [Falcon] starting up
>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 16:57:28 +0100
>>>>
>>>> Ah ok, thanks Gordon, I was tearing my hair out :-)
>>>>
>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>>>>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
>>>>> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
>>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 08:51:16 -0700
>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>> That comment is out of date. Code Model was the part of pre-Falcon
>> Flash Builder that built an abstract syntax tree to support
>> intelligent editing. We used it as the beginning of Falcon's lexer and
>> parser. The code is just looking at the AST to see if the constructor
>> has a non-public namespace.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Gordon
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Oct 1, 2014, at 8:33 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <
>> webdoublefx@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I updated it to v17.0 and check in
>> falcon\compiler\generated\dist\sdk\lib\external, is there.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> oops, looking better, it has both, just removed the bad one, it
>> runs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now, looking at internal\as\codegen\ClassDirectiveProcessor.java,
>>>>>> I
>> see that:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> // If a constructor has a namespace as part of it's declaration,
>>>>>> it
>> must be declared public.
>>>>>> // It is ok to omit the namespace
>>>>>> // We must check the AST, as CM treats all ctors as public no
>> matter what the user typed in
>>>>>> // so the FunctionDefinition will always be in the public
>>>>>> namespace if( node.getActualNamespaceNode() != null &&
>>>>>> node.getActualNamespaceNode().getName() !=
>> IASKeywordConstants.PUBLIC)
>>>>>> problems.add(new
>> ConstructorMustBePublicProblem(node.getActualNamespaceNode()));
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What is the CM or Code Model ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From: aharui@adobe.com
>>>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
>>>>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 13:36:50 +0000
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Could you have an old guava.jar?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 10/1/14 4:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I built it with ANT an ran Falcon compc.bat from the
>> generated/dist/sdk,
>>>>>>>> does anyone knows why I get that ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
>>>>>>>> com/google/common/cache/CacheLoader
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>> org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.MXMLC.<init>(MXMLC.java:379)
>>>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.<init>(COMPC.java:54)
>>>>>>>> at
>> org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.staticMainNoExit(COMPC.java:75)
>>>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.main(COMPC.java:63)
>>>>>>>> Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
>>>>>>>> com.google.common.cache.CacheLoader
>>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)
>>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)
>>>>>>>> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
>>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)
>>>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:424)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>> sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:308)
>>>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
>>>>>>>> ... 4 more
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>>>
AW: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.
But in java this is not much different. Unless you explicitly tell your Java VM to be strict, you can get a private constructor via Reflection, make this accesslible at runtime and instantiate it, no matter what the source-code says. Same with the type of generics.
So I guess it would be a great addition to Flex to at least have features checked by the compiler, even if the runtime doesn't enforce it.
Chris
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Gordon Smith [mailto:gsmithsf@hotmail.com]
Gesendet: Sonntag, 5. Oktober 2014 04:36
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
In general the ActionScript Virtual Machine enforces access modifiers (so that, for example, something marked private is truly inaccessible by any means outside the class) but I don't think the AVM enforces non-public constructors. I'm guessing that a constructor in the ABC is public regardless of what the source code says, which would mean that the constructor could be invoked by any code via reflection. If this is the case, I'm not convinced we should pretend that constructors can be non-public.
- Gordon
Sent from my iPad
> On Oct 4, 2014, at 4:14 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Oct 4, 2014 12:55 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I started to check if it was possible to have private and protected
> constructor in Falcon and I have to admit it was tricky especially
> because I never seen a compiler from inside before but it is
> apparently possible, I've been able to compile successfully:
>> package myLib {
>> public class CTORTest {
>> private var _p:int;
>>
>> private function CTORTest(p:int) {
>> _p = p;
>> }
>>
>> private function anotherFct():CTORTest {
>> return new CTORTest(10);
>> }
>> }
>> }
>> and using the compiled lib:
>>
>> <?xml version="1.0"?>
>> <s:Application xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009"
> xmlns:s="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/spark"
> creationComplete="creationCompleteHandler(event)">
>> <fx:Script><![CDATA[
>> import mx.events.FlexEvent;
>>
>> import myLib.CTORTest;
>>
>> private function creationCompleteHandler(event:FlexEvent):void {
>> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
>> }
>> ]]></fx:Script>
>> </s:Application>
>>
>> gives:
>> [Fault] exception, information=VerifyError: Error #1014: La classe
> myLib:CTORTest::CTORTest est introuvable. (not found) with the legacy
> compiler
>> and:
>> F:\sources\falconTestDrive\shell\src\Main.mxml:9
>> Erreur: Appel d'une méthode qui ne semble pas définie CTORTest. (Call
>> to
> a undefined method)
>> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
>>
>> (I will customize the error message later)
>>
>> I still need to check it works in the 3 possible ways to instantiate
>> a
> Class [1] (at the moment it works only with 1st one), check that works
> with is / instanceOf, revisit the cast function accordingly and maybe
> other things not yet in my mind and especially check FP won't complain using it.
>>
>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), new_type_name,
> ContainerID(expression*)) */
>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), expression,
> ContainerID(expression*)) */
>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), vector_literal,
> ContainerID(void)) */
>>
>> In case all this works and I'm far to know it at the moment, I will
>> have
> to think about implement "method overloading" otherwise I can't see
> any usage of a protected constructor and therefore will probably
> require some help for the best way to implement it.
>
> Exciting to see these kind of experiments. A really good usecase for
> private constructor would be to create a Singleton class, I.e a class
> that cannot be instantiated outside of itself. Would that be
> something you can test for?
>
> Thanks,
> Om
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Frédéric THOMAS
>>
>>> From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>>> Subject: RE: [Falcon] starting up
>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 16:57:28 +0100
>>>
>>> Ah ok, thanks Gordon, I was tearing my hair out :-)
>>>
>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>>>
>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
>>>> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 08:51:16 -0700
>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>>>>
>>>> That comment is out of date. Code Model was the part of pre-Falcon
> Flash Builder that built an abstract syntax tree to support
> intelligent editing. We used it as the beginning of Falcon's lexer and
> parser. The code is just looking at the AST to see if the constructor
> has a non-public namespace.
>>>>
>>>> - Gordon
>>>>
>>>>> On Oct 1, 2014, at 8:33 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <
> webdoublefx@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I updated it to v17.0 and check in
> falcon\compiler\generated\dist\sdk\lib\external, is there.
>>>>>
>>>>> oops, looking better, it has both, just removed the bad one, it
> runs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now, looking at internal\as\codegen\ClassDirectiveProcessor.java,
>>>>> I
> see that:
>>>>>
>>>>> // If a constructor has a namespace as part of it's declaration,
>>>>> it
> must be declared public.
>>>>> // It is ok to omit the namespace
>>>>> // We must check the AST, as CM treats all ctors as public no
> matter what the user typed in
>>>>> // so the FunctionDefinition will always be in the public
>>>>> namespace if( node.getActualNamespaceNode() != null &&
>>>>> node.getActualNamespaceNode().getName() !=
> IASKeywordConstants.PUBLIC)
>>>>> problems.add(new
> ConstructorMustBePublicProblem(node.getActualNamespaceNode()));
>>>>>
>>>>> What is the CM or Code Model ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>>>>>
>>>>>> From: aharui@adobe.com
>>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
>>>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 13:36:50 +0000
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Could you have an old guava.jar?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 10/1/14 4:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I built it with ANT an ran Falcon compc.bat from the
> generated/dist/sdk,
>>>>>>> does anyone knows why I get that ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
>>>>>>> com/google/common/cache/CacheLoader
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>> org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.MXMLC.<init>(MXMLC.java:379)
>>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.<init>(COMPC.java:54)
>>>>>>> at
> org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.staticMainNoExit(COMPC.java:75)
>>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.main(COMPC.java:63)
>>>>>>> Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
>>>>>>> com.google.common.cache.CacheLoader
>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)
>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)
>>>>>>> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)
>>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:424)
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>> sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:308)
>>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
>>>>>>> ... 4 more
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>>
RE: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
Posted by Frédéric THOMAS <we...@hotmail.com>.
@Om, I've been able to compile:
package myLib {
public class CTORTest {
public static const INSTANCE:CTORTest = new CTORTest(11);
private var _p:int;
private function CTORTest(p:int) {
_p = p;
}
public function get p():int {
return _p;
}
}
}
and run:
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<s:Application xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009" xmlns:s="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/spark" creationComplete="creationCompleteHandler(event)">
<fx:Script><![CDATA[
import mx.events.FlexEvent;
import myLib.CTORTest;
private function creationCompleteHandler(event:FlexEvent):void {
trace(CTORTest.INSTANCE.p);
//var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
// Compile time:
//F:\sources\falconTestDrive\shell\src\Main.mxml:10
//Erreur: Appel à une méthode qui ne semble pas définie CTORTest.
//var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
// ^
}
]]></fx:Script>
</s:Application>
But work in the legacy compiler now if I uncomment the instantiation :P
Frédéric THOMAS
> From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 06:55:47 +0100
>
> Gorgon, sorry as well, I didn't mean FB but FP, I use to write faster than I think :P
>
> Frédéric THOMAS
>
> > From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
> > To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> > Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 06:31:26 +0100
> >
> > @Om, sorry, I misreading but yes, singleton means also some static methods and I tried it having some trouble with but don't think it will be for a long time.
> >
> > Frédéric THOMAS
> >
> > > From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
> > > To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > > Subject: RE: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> > > Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 06:22:50 +0100
> > >
> > > @Om, Didn't mentioned it because I guess the implementation for "new" and the relative checks are almost the same than for the extends and now I understand better FP, even though I mentioned method overloading implementation, actually, I guess it could be even done without but would be cleaner with, I'm anyway close to and will demonstrate the extends soon.
> > > I guess I did the hardest part in compiling a lib and be able to have some NS informations passed thru the ABC without FP complaining and keeping the original implementation intention in not modifying the CMImplicit NS to not make FB complaining as mentioned in the method comments).
> > >
> > > @Gordon, from what I've seen at the moment, I guess you're right, the constructor is just a function, FB doesn't enforce NS, everything is done at compile time, the only barrier was the CMImplicitNS, I kept it and passed other NS info thru the abc, you will see the code relatively soon, I guess next weekend (my time on it is very limited) and I would like you to review it if you don't mind, and for the reflection maybe there will be some tricks but as I do it at the moment, even the legacy compiler raise a verify error when I try to instantiate a class with a private ctor.
> > >
> > >
> > > Frédéric THOMAS
> > >
> > > > Subject: Re: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> > > > From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
> > > > Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2014 19:35:42 -0700
> > > > To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > > >
> > > > In general the ActionScript Virtual Machine enforces access modifiers (so that, for example, something marked private is truly inaccessible by any means outside the class) but I don't think the AVM enforces non-public constructors. I'm guessing that a constructor in the ABC is public regardless of what the source code says, which would mean that the constructor could be invoked by any code via reflection. If this is the case, I'm not convinced we should pretend that constructors can be non-public.
> > > >
> > > > - Gordon
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my iPad
> > > >
> > > > > On Oct 4, 2014, at 4:14 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> On Oct 4, 2014 12:55 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Hi,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I started to check if it was possible to have private and protected
> > > > > constructor in Falcon and I have to admit it was tricky especially because
> > > > > I never seen a compiler from inside before but it is apparently possible,
> > > > > I've been able to compile successfully:
> > > > >> package myLib {
> > > > >> public class CTORTest {
> > > > >> private var _p:int;
> > > > >>
> > > > >> private function CTORTest(p:int) {
> > > > >> _p = p;
> > > > >> }
> > > > >>
> > > > >> private function anotherFct():CTORTest {
> > > > >> return new CTORTest(10);
> > > > >> }
> > > > >> }
> > > > >> }
> > > > >> and using the compiled lib:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> <?xml version="1.0"?>
> > > > >> <s:Application xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009"
> > > > > xmlns:s="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/spark"
> > > > > creationComplete="creationCompleteHandler(event)">
> > > > >> <fx:Script><![CDATA[
> > > > >> import mx.events.FlexEvent;
> > > > >>
> > > > >> import myLib.CTORTest;
> > > > >>
> > > > >> private function creationCompleteHandler(event:FlexEvent):void {
> > > > >> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
> > > > >> }
> > > > >> ]]></fx:Script>
> > > > >> </s:Application>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> gives:
> > > > >> [Fault] exception, information=VerifyError: Error #1014: La classe
> > > > > myLib:CTORTest::CTORTest est introuvable. (not found) with the legacy
> > > > > compiler
> > > > >> and:
> > > > >> F:\sources\falconTestDrive\shell\src\Main.mxml:9
> > > > >> Erreur: Appel d'une méthode qui ne semble pas définie CTORTest. (Call to
> > > > > a undefined method)
> > > > >> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
> > > > >>
> > > > >> (I will customize the error message later)
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I still need to check it works in the 3 possible ways to instantiate a
> > > > > Class [1] (at the moment it works only with 1st one), check that works with
> > > > > is / instanceOf, revisit the cast function accordingly and maybe other
> > > > > things not yet in my mind and especially check FP won't complain using it.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), new_type_name,
> > > > > ContainerID(expression*)) */
> > > > >> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), expression,
> > > > > ContainerID(expression*)) */
> > > > >> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), vector_literal,
> > > > > ContainerID(void)) */
> > > > >>
> > > > >> In case all this works and I'm far to know it at the moment, I will have
> > > > > to think about implement "method overloading" otherwise I can't see any
> > > > > usage of a protected constructor and therefore will probably require some
> > > > > help for the best way to implement it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Exciting to see these kind of experiments. A really good usecase for
> > > > > private constructor would be to create a Singleton class, I.e a class that
> > > > > cannot be instantiated outside of itself. Would that be something you can
> > > > > test for?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Om
> > > > >
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Thanks,
> > > > >> Frédéric THOMAS
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
> > > > >>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > > > >>> Subject: RE: [Falcon] starting up
> > > > >>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 16:57:28 +0100
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Ah ok, thanks Gordon, I was tearing my hair out :-)
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Frédéric THOMAS
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> > > > >>>> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
> > > > >>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 08:51:16 -0700
> > > > >>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> That comment is out of date. Code Model was the part of pre-Falcon
> > > > > Flash Builder that built an abstract syntax tree to support intelligent
> > > > > editing. We used it as the beginning of Falcon's lexer and parser. The code
> > > > > is just looking at the AST to see if the constructor has a non-public
> > > > > namespace.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> - Gordon
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>> On Oct 1, 2014, at 8:33 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <
> > > > > webdoublefx@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> I updated it to v17.0 and check in
> > > > > falcon\compiler\generated\dist\sdk\lib\external, is there.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> oops, looking better, it has both, just removed the bad one, it
> > > > > runs.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Now, looking at internal\as\codegen\ClassDirectiveProcessor.java, I
> > > > > see that:
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> // If a constructor has a namespace as part of it's declaration, it
> > > > > must be declared public.
> > > > >>>>> // It is ok to omit the namespace
> > > > >>>>> // We must check the AST, as CM treats all ctors as public no
> > > > > matter what the user typed in
> > > > >>>>> // so the FunctionDefinition will always be in the public namespace
> > > > >>>>> if( node.getActualNamespaceNode() != null &&
> > > > >>>>> node.getActualNamespaceNode().getName() !=
> > > > > IASKeywordConstants.PUBLIC)
> > > > >>>>> problems.add(new
> > > > > ConstructorMustBePublicProblem(node.getActualNamespaceNode()));
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> What is the CM or Code Model ?
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Thanks,
> > > > >>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> From: aharui@adobe.com
> > > > >>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > > > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> > > > >>>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 13:36:50 +0000
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Could you have an old guava.jar?
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> On 10/1/14 4:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> Hi,
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> I built it with ANT an ran Falcon compc.bat from the
> > > > > generated/dist/sdk,
> > > > >>>>>>> does anyone knows why I get that ?
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> > > > >>>>>>> com/google/common/cache/CacheLoader
> > > > >>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.MXMLC.<init>(MXMLC.java:379)
> > > > >>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.<init>(COMPC.java:54)
> > > > >>>>>>> at
> > > > > org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.staticMainNoExit(COMPC.java:75)
> > > > >>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.main(COMPC.java:63)
> > > > >>>>>>> Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
> > > > >>>>>>> com.google.common.cache.CacheLoader
> > > > >>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)
> > > > >>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)
> > > > >>>>>>> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
> > > > >>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)
> > > > >>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:424)
> > > > >>>>>>> at sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:308)
> > > > >>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
> > > > >>>>>>> ... 4 more
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> Thanks,
> > > > >>>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> > > > >>
> > >
> >
>
RE: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
Posted by Frédéric THOMAS <we...@hotmail.com>.
Gorgon, sorry as well, I didn't mean FB but FP, I use to write faster than I think :P
Frédéric THOMAS
> From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 06:31:26 +0100
>
> @Om, sorry, I misreading but yes, singleton means also some static methods and I tried it having some trouble with but don't think it will be for a long time.
>
> Frédéric THOMAS
>
> > From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
> > To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> > Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 06:22:50 +0100
> >
> > @Om, Didn't mentioned it because I guess the implementation for "new" and the relative checks are almost the same than for the extends and now I understand better FP, even though I mentioned method overloading implementation, actually, I guess it could be even done without but would be cleaner with, I'm anyway close to and will demonstrate the extends soon.
> > I guess I did the hardest part in compiling a lib and be able to have some NS informations passed thru the ABC without FP complaining and keeping the original implementation intention in not modifying the CMImplicit NS to not make FB complaining as mentioned in the method comments).
> >
> > @Gordon, from what I've seen at the moment, I guess you're right, the constructor is just a function, FB doesn't enforce NS, everything is done at compile time, the only barrier was the CMImplicitNS, I kept it and passed other NS info thru the abc, you will see the code relatively soon, I guess next weekend (my time on it is very limited) and I would like you to review it if you don't mind, and for the reflection maybe there will be some tricks but as I do it at the moment, even the legacy compiler raise a verify error when I try to instantiate a class with a private ctor.
> >
> >
> > Frédéric THOMAS
> >
> > > Subject: Re: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> > > From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
> > > Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2014 19:35:42 -0700
> > > To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > >
> > > In general the ActionScript Virtual Machine enforces access modifiers (so that, for example, something marked private is truly inaccessible by any means outside the class) but I don't think the AVM enforces non-public constructors. I'm guessing that a constructor in the ABC is public regardless of what the source code says, which would mean that the constructor could be invoked by any code via reflection. If this is the case, I'm not convinced we should pretend that constructors can be non-public.
> > >
> > > - Gordon
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPad
> > >
> > > > On Oct 4, 2014, at 4:14 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> On Oct 4, 2014 12:55 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Hi,
> > > >>
> > > >> I started to check if it was possible to have private and protected
> > > > constructor in Falcon and I have to admit it was tricky especially because
> > > > I never seen a compiler from inside before but it is apparently possible,
> > > > I've been able to compile successfully:
> > > >> package myLib {
> > > >> public class CTORTest {
> > > >> private var _p:int;
> > > >>
> > > >> private function CTORTest(p:int) {
> > > >> _p = p;
> > > >> }
> > > >>
> > > >> private function anotherFct():CTORTest {
> > > >> return new CTORTest(10);
> > > >> }
> > > >> }
> > > >> }
> > > >> and using the compiled lib:
> > > >>
> > > >> <?xml version="1.0"?>
> > > >> <s:Application xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009"
> > > > xmlns:s="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/spark"
> > > > creationComplete="creationCompleteHandler(event)">
> > > >> <fx:Script><![CDATA[
> > > >> import mx.events.FlexEvent;
> > > >>
> > > >> import myLib.CTORTest;
> > > >>
> > > >> private function creationCompleteHandler(event:FlexEvent):void {
> > > >> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
> > > >> }
> > > >> ]]></fx:Script>
> > > >> </s:Application>
> > > >>
> > > >> gives:
> > > >> [Fault] exception, information=VerifyError: Error #1014: La classe
> > > > myLib:CTORTest::CTORTest est introuvable. (not found) with the legacy
> > > > compiler
> > > >> and:
> > > >> F:\sources\falconTestDrive\shell\src\Main.mxml:9
> > > >> Erreur: Appel d'une méthode qui ne semble pas définie CTORTest. (Call to
> > > > a undefined method)
> > > >> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
> > > >>
> > > >> (I will customize the error message later)
> > > >>
> > > >> I still need to check it works in the 3 possible ways to instantiate a
> > > > Class [1] (at the moment it works only with 1st one), check that works with
> > > > is / instanceOf, revisit the cast function accordingly and maybe other
> > > > things not yet in my mind and especially check FP won't complain using it.
> > > >>
> > > >> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), new_type_name,
> > > > ContainerID(expression*)) */
> > > >> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), expression,
> > > > ContainerID(expression*)) */
> > > >> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), vector_literal,
> > > > ContainerID(void)) */
> > > >>
> > > >> In case all this works and I'm far to know it at the moment, I will have
> > > > to think about implement "method overloading" otherwise I can't see any
> > > > usage of a protected constructor and therefore will probably require some
> > > > help for the best way to implement it.
> > > >
> > > > Exciting to see these kind of experiments. A really good usecase for
> > > > private constructor would be to create a Singleton class, I.e a class that
> > > > cannot be instantiated outside of itself. Would that be something you can
> > > > test for?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Om
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks,
> > > >> Frédéric THOMAS
> > > >>
> > > >>> From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
> > > >>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > > >>> Subject: RE: [Falcon] starting up
> > > >>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 16:57:28 +0100
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Ah ok, thanks Gordon, I was tearing my hair out :-)
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Frédéric THOMAS
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> > > >>>> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
> > > >>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 08:51:16 -0700
> > > >>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> That comment is out of date. Code Model was the part of pre-Falcon
> > > > Flash Builder that built an abstract syntax tree to support intelligent
> > > > editing. We used it as the beginning of Falcon's lexer and parser. The code
> > > > is just looking at the AST to see if the constructor has a non-public
> > > > namespace.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> - Gordon
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> On Oct 1, 2014, at 8:33 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <
> > > > webdoublefx@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> I updated it to v17.0 and check in
> > > > falcon\compiler\generated\dist\sdk\lib\external, is there.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> oops, looking better, it has both, just removed the bad one, it
> > > > runs.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Now, looking at internal\as\codegen\ClassDirectiveProcessor.java, I
> > > > see that:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> // If a constructor has a namespace as part of it's declaration, it
> > > > must be declared public.
> > > >>>>> // It is ok to omit the namespace
> > > >>>>> // We must check the AST, as CM treats all ctors as public no
> > > > matter what the user typed in
> > > >>>>> // so the FunctionDefinition will always be in the public namespace
> > > >>>>> if( node.getActualNamespaceNode() != null &&
> > > >>>>> node.getActualNamespaceNode().getName() !=
> > > > IASKeywordConstants.PUBLIC)
> > > >>>>> problems.add(new
> > > > ConstructorMustBePublicProblem(node.getActualNamespaceNode()));
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> What is the CM or Code Model ?
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Thanks,
> > > >>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> From: aharui@adobe.com
> > > >>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> > > >>>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 13:36:50 +0000
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Could you have an old guava.jar?
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> On 10/1/14 4:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Hi,
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> I built it with ANT an ran Falcon compc.bat from the
> > > > generated/dist/sdk,
> > > >>>>>>> does anyone knows why I get that ?
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> > > >>>>>>> com/google/common/cache/CacheLoader
> > > >>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.MXMLC.<init>(MXMLC.java:379)
> > > >>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.<init>(COMPC.java:54)
> > > >>>>>>> at
> > > > org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.staticMainNoExit(COMPC.java:75)
> > > >>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.main(COMPC.java:63)
> > > >>>>>>> Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
> > > >>>>>>> com.google.common.cache.CacheLoader
> > > >>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)
> > > >>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)
> > > >>>>>>> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
> > > >>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)
> > > >>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:424)
> > > >>>>>>> at sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:308)
> > > >>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
> > > >>>>>>> ... 4 more
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Thanks,
> > > >>>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> > > >>
> >
>
RE: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
Posted by Frédéric THOMAS <we...@hotmail.com>.
@Om, sorry, I misreading but yes, singleton means also some static methods and I tried it having some trouble with but don't think it will be for a long time.
Frédéric THOMAS
> From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 06:22:50 +0100
>
> @Om, Didn't mentioned it because I guess the implementation for "new" and the relative checks are almost the same than for the extends and now I understand better FP, even though I mentioned method overloading implementation, actually, I guess it could be even done without but would be cleaner with, I'm anyway close to and will demonstrate the extends soon.
> I guess I did the hardest part in compiling a lib and be able to have some NS informations passed thru the ABC without FP complaining and keeping the original implementation intention in not modifying the CMImplicit NS to not make FB complaining as mentioned in the method comments).
>
> @Gordon, from what I've seen at the moment, I guess you're right, the constructor is just a function, FB doesn't enforce NS, everything is done at compile time, the only barrier was the CMImplicitNS, I kept it and passed other NS info thru the abc, you will see the code relatively soon, I guess next weekend (my time on it is very limited) and I would like you to review it if you don't mind, and for the reflection maybe there will be some tricks but as I do it at the moment, even the legacy compiler raise a verify error when I try to instantiate a class with a private ctor.
>
>
> Frédéric THOMAS
>
> > Subject: Re: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> > From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
> > Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2014 19:35:42 -0700
> > To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >
> > In general the ActionScript Virtual Machine enforces access modifiers (so that, for example, something marked private is truly inaccessible by any means outside the class) but I don't think the AVM enforces non-public constructors. I'm guessing that a constructor in the ABC is public regardless of what the source code says, which would mean that the constructor could be invoked by any code via reflection. If this is the case, I'm not convinced we should pretend that constructors can be non-public.
> >
> > - Gordon
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> > > On Oct 4, 2014, at 4:14 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Oct 4, 2014 12:55 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> I started to check if it was possible to have private and protected
> > > constructor in Falcon and I have to admit it was tricky especially because
> > > I never seen a compiler from inside before but it is apparently possible,
> > > I've been able to compile successfully:
> > >> package myLib {
> > >> public class CTORTest {
> > >> private var _p:int;
> > >>
> > >> private function CTORTest(p:int) {
> > >> _p = p;
> > >> }
> > >>
> > >> private function anotherFct():CTORTest {
> > >> return new CTORTest(10);
> > >> }
> > >> }
> > >> }
> > >> and using the compiled lib:
> > >>
> > >> <?xml version="1.0"?>
> > >> <s:Application xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009"
> > > xmlns:s="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/spark"
> > > creationComplete="creationCompleteHandler(event)">
> > >> <fx:Script><![CDATA[
> > >> import mx.events.FlexEvent;
> > >>
> > >> import myLib.CTORTest;
> > >>
> > >> private function creationCompleteHandler(event:FlexEvent):void {
> > >> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
> > >> }
> > >> ]]></fx:Script>
> > >> </s:Application>
> > >>
> > >> gives:
> > >> [Fault] exception, information=VerifyError: Error #1014: La classe
> > > myLib:CTORTest::CTORTest est introuvable. (not found) with the legacy
> > > compiler
> > >> and:
> > >> F:\sources\falconTestDrive\shell\src\Main.mxml:9
> > >> Erreur: Appel d'une méthode qui ne semble pas définie CTORTest. (Call to
> > > a undefined method)
> > >> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
> > >>
> > >> (I will customize the error message later)
> > >>
> > >> I still need to check it works in the 3 possible ways to instantiate a
> > > Class [1] (at the moment it works only with 1st one), check that works with
> > > is / instanceOf, revisit the cast function accordingly and maybe other
> > > things not yet in my mind and especially check FP won't complain using it.
> > >>
> > >> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), new_type_name,
> > > ContainerID(expression*)) */
> > >> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), expression,
> > > ContainerID(expression*)) */
> > >> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), vector_literal,
> > > ContainerID(void)) */
> > >>
> > >> In case all this works and I'm far to know it at the moment, I will have
> > > to think about implement "method overloading" otherwise I can't see any
> > > usage of a protected constructor and therefore will probably require some
> > > help for the best way to implement it.
> > >
> > > Exciting to see these kind of experiments. A really good usecase for
> > > private constructor would be to create a Singleton class, I.e a class that
> > > cannot be instantiated outside of itself. Would that be something you can
> > > test for?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Om
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> Frédéric THOMAS
> > >>
> > >>> From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
> > >>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > >>> Subject: RE: [Falcon] starting up
> > >>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 16:57:28 +0100
> > >>>
> > >>> Ah ok, thanks Gordon, I was tearing my hair out :-)
> > >>>
> > >>> Frédéric THOMAS
> > >>>
> > >>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> > >>>> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
> > >>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 08:51:16 -0700
> > >>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > >>>>
> > >>>> That comment is out of date. Code Model was the part of pre-Falcon
> > > Flash Builder that built an abstract syntax tree to support intelligent
> > > editing. We used it as the beginning of Falcon's lexer and parser. The code
> > > is just looking at the AST to see if the constructor has a non-public
> > > namespace.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> - Gordon
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> On Oct 1, 2014, at 8:33 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <
> > > webdoublefx@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I updated it to v17.0 and check in
> > > falcon\compiler\generated\dist\sdk\lib\external, is there.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> oops, looking better, it has both, just removed the bad one, it
> > > runs.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Now, looking at internal\as\codegen\ClassDirectiveProcessor.java, I
> > > see that:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> // If a constructor has a namespace as part of it's declaration, it
> > > must be declared public.
> > >>>>> // It is ok to omit the namespace
> > >>>>> // We must check the AST, as CM treats all ctors as public no
> > > matter what the user typed in
> > >>>>> // so the FunctionDefinition will always be in the public namespace
> > >>>>> if( node.getActualNamespaceNode() != null &&
> > >>>>> node.getActualNamespaceNode().getName() !=
> > > IASKeywordConstants.PUBLIC)
> > >>>>> problems.add(new
> > > ConstructorMustBePublicProblem(node.getActualNamespaceNode()));
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> What is the CM or Code Model ?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> From: aharui@adobe.com
> > >>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> > >>>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 13:36:50 +0000
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Could you have an old guava.jar?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On 10/1/14 4:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Hi,
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> I built it with ANT an ran Falcon compc.bat from the
> > > generated/dist/sdk,
> > >>>>>>> does anyone knows why I get that ?
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> > >>>>>>> com/google/common/cache/CacheLoader
> > >>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.MXMLC.<init>(MXMLC.java:379)
> > >>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.<init>(COMPC.java:54)
> > >>>>>>> at
> > > org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.staticMainNoExit(COMPC.java:75)
> > >>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.main(COMPC.java:63)
> > >>>>>>> Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
> > >>>>>>> com.google.common.cache.CacheLoader
> > >>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)
> > >>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)
> > >>>>>>> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
> > >>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)
> > >>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:424)
> > >>>>>>> at sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:308)
> > >>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
> > >>>>>>> ... 4 more
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> > >>
>
RE: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
Posted by Frédéric THOMAS <we...@hotmail.com>.
@Om, Didn't mentioned it because I guess the implementation for "new" and the relative checks are almost the same than for the extends and now I understand better FP, even though I mentioned method overloading implementation, actually, I guess it could be even done without but would be cleaner with, I'm anyway close to and will demonstrate the extends soon.
I guess I did the hardest part in compiling a lib and be able to have some NS informations passed thru the ABC without FP complaining and keeping the original implementation intention in not modifying the CMImplicit NS to not make FB complaining as mentioned in the method comments).
@Gordon, from what I've seen at the moment, I guess you're right, the constructor is just a function, FB doesn't enforce NS, everything is done at compile time, the only barrier was the CMImplicitNS, I kept it and passed other NS info thru the abc, you will see the code relatively soon, I guess next weekend (my time on it is very limited) and I would like you to review it if you don't mind, and for the reflection maybe there will be some tricks but as I do it at the moment, even the legacy compiler raise a verify error when I try to instantiate a class with a private ctor.
Frédéric THOMAS
> Subject: Re: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2014 19:35:42 -0700
> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>
> In general the ActionScript Virtual Machine enforces access modifiers (so that, for example, something marked private is truly inaccessible by any means outside the class) but I don't think the AVM enforces non-public constructors. I'm guessing that a constructor in the ABC is public regardless of what the source code says, which would mean that the constructor could be invoked by any code via reflection. If this is the case, I'm not convinced we should pretend that constructors can be non-public.
>
> - Gordon
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> > On Oct 4, 2014, at 4:14 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Oct 4, 2014 12:55 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I started to check if it was possible to have private and protected
> > constructor in Falcon and I have to admit it was tricky especially because
> > I never seen a compiler from inside before but it is apparently possible,
> > I've been able to compile successfully:
> >> package myLib {
> >> public class CTORTest {
> >> private var _p:int;
> >>
> >> private function CTORTest(p:int) {
> >> _p = p;
> >> }
> >>
> >> private function anotherFct():CTORTest {
> >> return new CTORTest(10);
> >> }
> >> }
> >> }
> >> and using the compiled lib:
> >>
> >> <?xml version="1.0"?>
> >> <s:Application xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009"
> > xmlns:s="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/spark"
> > creationComplete="creationCompleteHandler(event)">
> >> <fx:Script><![CDATA[
> >> import mx.events.FlexEvent;
> >>
> >> import myLib.CTORTest;
> >>
> >> private function creationCompleteHandler(event:FlexEvent):void {
> >> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
> >> }
> >> ]]></fx:Script>
> >> </s:Application>
> >>
> >> gives:
> >> [Fault] exception, information=VerifyError: Error #1014: La classe
> > myLib:CTORTest::CTORTest est introuvable. (not found) with the legacy
> > compiler
> >> and:
> >> F:\sources\falconTestDrive\shell\src\Main.mxml:9
> >> Erreur: Appel d'une méthode qui ne semble pas définie CTORTest. (Call to
> > a undefined method)
> >> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
> >>
> >> (I will customize the error message later)
> >>
> >> I still need to check it works in the 3 possible ways to instantiate a
> > Class [1] (at the moment it works only with 1st one), check that works with
> > is / instanceOf, revisit the cast function accordingly and maybe other
> > things not yet in my mind and especially check FP won't complain using it.
> >>
> >> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), new_type_name,
> > ContainerID(expression*)) */
> >> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), expression,
> > ContainerID(expression*)) */
> >> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), vector_literal,
> > ContainerID(void)) */
> >>
> >> In case all this works and I'm far to know it at the moment, I will have
> > to think about implement "method overloading" otherwise I can't see any
> > usage of a protected constructor and therefore will probably require some
> > help for the best way to implement it.
> >
> > Exciting to see these kind of experiments. A really good usecase for
> > private constructor would be to create a Singleton class, I.e a class that
> > cannot be instantiated outside of itself. Would that be something you can
> > test for?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Om
> >
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Frédéric THOMAS
> >>
> >>> From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
> >>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >>> Subject: RE: [Falcon] starting up
> >>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 16:57:28 +0100
> >>>
> >>> Ah ok, thanks Gordon, I was tearing my hair out :-)
> >>>
> >>> Frédéric THOMAS
> >>>
> >>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> >>>> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
> >>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 08:51:16 -0700
> >>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >>>>
> >>>> That comment is out of date. Code Model was the part of pre-Falcon
> > Flash Builder that built an abstract syntax tree to support intelligent
> > editing. We used it as the beginning of Falcon's lexer and parser. The code
> > is just looking at the AST to see if the constructor has a non-public
> > namespace.
> >>>>
> >>>> - Gordon
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Oct 1, 2014, at 8:33 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <
> > webdoublefx@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I updated it to v17.0 and check in
> > falcon\compiler\generated\dist\sdk\lib\external, is there.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> oops, looking better, it has both, just removed the bad one, it
> > runs.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Now, looking at internal\as\codegen\ClassDirectiveProcessor.java, I
> > see that:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> // If a constructor has a namespace as part of it's declaration, it
> > must be declared public.
> >>>>> // It is ok to omit the namespace
> >>>>> // We must check the AST, as CM treats all ctors as public no
> > matter what the user typed in
> >>>>> // so the FunctionDefinition will always be in the public namespace
> >>>>> if( node.getActualNamespaceNode() != null &&
> >>>>> node.getActualNamespaceNode().getName() !=
> > IASKeywordConstants.PUBLIC)
> >>>>> problems.add(new
> > ConstructorMustBePublicProblem(node.getActualNamespaceNode()));
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What is the CM or Code Model ?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> From: aharui@adobe.com
> >>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> >>>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 13:36:50 +0000
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Could you have an old guava.jar?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 10/1/14 4:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I built it with ANT an ran Falcon compc.bat from the
> > generated/dist/sdk,
> >>>>>>> does anyone knows why I get that ?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> >>>>>>> com/google/common/cache/CacheLoader
> >>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.MXMLC.<init>(MXMLC.java:379)
> >>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.<init>(COMPC.java:54)
> >>>>>>> at
> > org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.staticMainNoExit(COMPC.java:75)
> >>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.main(COMPC.java:63)
> >>>>>>> Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
> >>>>>>> com.google.common.cache.CacheLoader
> >>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)
> >>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)
> >>>>>>> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
> >>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)
> >>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:424)
> >>>>>>> at sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:308)
> >>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
> >>>>>>> ... 4 more
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
> >>
Re: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
Posted by Gordon Smith <gs...@hotmail.com>.
In general the ActionScript Virtual Machine enforces access modifiers (so that, for example, something marked private is truly inaccessible by any means outside the class) but I don't think the AVM enforces non-public constructors. I'm guessing that a constructor in the ABC is public regardless of what the source code says, which would mean that the constructor could be invoked by any code via reflection. If this is the case, I'm not convinced we should pretend that constructors can be non-public.
- Gordon
Sent from my iPad
> On Oct 4, 2014, at 4:14 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Oct 4, 2014 12:55 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I started to check if it was possible to have private and protected
> constructor in Falcon and I have to admit it was tricky especially because
> I never seen a compiler from inside before but it is apparently possible,
> I've been able to compile successfully:
>> package myLib {
>> public class CTORTest {
>> private var _p:int;
>>
>> private function CTORTest(p:int) {
>> _p = p;
>> }
>>
>> private function anotherFct():CTORTest {
>> return new CTORTest(10);
>> }
>> }
>> }
>> and using the compiled lib:
>>
>> <?xml version="1.0"?>
>> <s:Application xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009"
> xmlns:s="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/spark"
> creationComplete="creationCompleteHandler(event)">
>> <fx:Script><![CDATA[
>> import mx.events.FlexEvent;
>>
>> import myLib.CTORTest;
>>
>> private function creationCompleteHandler(event:FlexEvent):void {
>> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
>> }
>> ]]></fx:Script>
>> </s:Application>
>>
>> gives:
>> [Fault] exception, information=VerifyError: Error #1014: La classe
> myLib:CTORTest::CTORTest est introuvable. (not found) with the legacy
> compiler
>> and:
>> F:\sources\falconTestDrive\shell\src\Main.mxml:9
>> Erreur: Appel d'une méthode qui ne semble pas définie CTORTest. (Call to
> a undefined method)
>> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
>>
>> (I will customize the error message later)
>>
>> I still need to check it works in the 3 possible ways to instantiate a
> Class [1] (at the moment it works only with 1st one), check that works with
> is / instanceOf, revisit the cast function accordingly and maybe other
> things not yet in my mind and especially check FP won't complain using it.
>>
>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), new_type_name,
> ContainerID(expression*)) */
>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), expression,
> ContainerID(expression*)) */
>> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), vector_literal,
> ContainerID(void)) */
>>
>> In case all this works and I'm far to know it at the moment, I will have
> to think about implement "method overloading" otherwise I can't see any
> usage of a protected constructor and therefore will probably require some
> help for the best way to implement it.
>
> Exciting to see these kind of experiments. A really good usecase for
> private constructor would be to create a Singleton class, I.e a class that
> cannot be instantiated outside of itself. Would that be something you can
> test for?
>
> Thanks,
> Om
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Frédéric THOMAS
>>
>>> From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>>> Subject: RE: [Falcon] starting up
>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 16:57:28 +0100
>>>
>>> Ah ok, thanks Gordon, I was tearing my hair out :-)
>>>
>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>>>
>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
>>>> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 08:51:16 -0700
>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>>>>
>>>> That comment is out of date. Code Model was the part of pre-Falcon
> Flash Builder that built an abstract syntax tree to support intelligent
> editing. We used it as the beginning of Falcon's lexer and parser. The code
> is just looking at the AST to see if the constructor has a non-public
> namespace.
>>>>
>>>> - Gordon
>>>>
>>>>> On Oct 1, 2014, at 8:33 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <
> webdoublefx@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I updated it to v17.0 and check in
> falcon\compiler\generated\dist\sdk\lib\external, is there.
>>>>>
>>>>> oops, looking better, it has both, just removed the bad one, it
> runs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now, looking at internal\as\codegen\ClassDirectiveProcessor.java, I
> see that:
>>>>>
>>>>> // If a constructor has a namespace as part of it's declaration, it
> must be declared public.
>>>>> // It is ok to omit the namespace
>>>>> // We must check the AST, as CM treats all ctors as public no
> matter what the user typed in
>>>>> // so the FunctionDefinition will always be in the public namespace
>>>>> if( node.getActualNamespaceNode() != null &&
>>>>> node.getActualNamespaceNode().getName() !=
> IASKeywordConstants.PUBLIC)
>>>>> problems.add(new
> ConstructorMustBePublicProblem(node.getActualNamespaceNode()));
>>>>>
>>>>> What is the CM or Code Model ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>>>>>
>>>>>> From: aharui@adobe.com
>>>>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
>>>>>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 13:36:50 +0000
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Could you have an old guava.jar?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 10/1/14 4:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I built it with ANT an ran Falcon compc.bat from the
> generated/dist/sdk,
>>>>>>> does anyone knows why I get that ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
>>>>>>> com/google/common/cache/CacheLoader
>>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.MXMLC.<init>(MXMLC.java:379)
>>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.<init>(COMPC.java:54)
>>>>>>> at
> org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.staticMainNoExit(COMPC.java:75)
>>>>>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.main(COMPC.java:63)
>>>>>>> Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
>>>>>>> com.google.common.cache.CacheLoader
>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)
>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)
>>>>>>> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
>>>>>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)
>>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:424)
>>>>>>> at sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:308)
>>>>>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
>>>>>>> ... 4 more
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>>
Re: [Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
Posted by OmPrakash Muppirala <bi...@gmail.com>.
On Oct 4, 2014 12:55 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I started to check if it was possible to have private and protected
constructor in Falcon and I have to admit it was tricky especially because
I never seen a compiler from inside before but it is apparently possible,
I've been able to compile successfully:
> package myLib {
> public class CTORTest {
> private var _p:int;
>
> private function CTORTest(p:int) {
> _p = p;
> }
>
> private function anotherFct():CTORTest {
> return new CTORTest(10);
> }
> }
> }
> and using the compiled lib:
>
> <?xml version="1.0"?>
> <s:Application xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009"
xmlns:s="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/spark"
creationComplete="creationCompleteHandler(event)">
> <fx:Script><![CDATA[
> import mx.events.FlexEvent;
>
> import myLib.CTORTest;
>
> private function creationCompleteHandler(event:FlexEvent):void {
> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
> }
> ]]></fx:Script>
> </s:Application>
>
> gives:
> [Fault] exception, information=VerifyError: Error #1014: La classe
myLib:CTORTest::CTORTest est introuvable. (not found) with the legacy
compiler
> and:
> F:\sources\falconTestDrive\shell\src\Main.mxml:9
> Erreur: Appel d'une méthode qui ne semble pas définie CTORTest. (Call to
a undefined method)
> var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
>
> (I will customize the error message later)
>
> I still need to check it works in the 3 possible ways to instantiate a
Class [1] (at the moment it works only with 1st one), check that works with
is / instanceOf, revisit the cast function accordingly and maybe other
things not yet in my mind and especially check FP won't complain using it.
>
> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), new_type_name,
ContainerID(expression*)) */
> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), expression,
ContainerID(expression*)) */
> /* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), vector_literal,
ContainerID(void)) */
>
> In case all this works and I'm far to know it at the moment, I will have
to think about implement "method overloading" otherwise I can't see any
usage of a protected constructor and therefore will probably require some
help for the best way to implement it.
Exciting to see these kind of experiments. A really good usecase for
private constructor would be to create a Singleton class, I.e a class that
cannot be instantiated outside of itself. Would that be something you can
test for?
Thanks,
Om
>
> Thanks,
> Frédéric THOMAS
>
> > From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
> > To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: [Falcon] starting up
> > Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 16:57:28 +0100
> >
> > Ah ok, thanks Gordon, I was tearing my hair out :-)
> >
> > Frédéric THOMAS
> >
> > > Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> > > From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
> > > Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 08:51:16 -0700
> > > To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > >
> > > That comment is out of date. Code Model was the part of pre-Falcon
Flash Builder that built an abstract syntax tree to support intelligent
editing. We used it as the beginning of Falcon's lexer and parser. The code
is just looking at the AST to see if the constructor has a non-public
namespace.
> > >
> > > - Gordon
> > >
> > > > On Oct 1, 2014, at 8:33 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <
webdoublefx@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I updated it to v17.0 and check in
falcon\compiler\generated\dist\sdk\lib\external, is there.
> > > >
> > > > oops, looking better, it has both, just removed the bad one, it
runs.
> > > >
> > > > Now, looking at internal\as\codegen\ClassDirectiveProcessor.java, I
see that:
> > > >
> > > > // If a constructor has a namespace as part of it's declaration, it
must be declared public.
> > > > // It is ok to omit the namespace
> > > > // We must check the AST, as CM treats all ctors as public no
matter what the user typed in
> > > > // so the FunctionDefinition will always be in the public namespace
> > > > if( node.getActualNamespaceNode() != null &&
> > > > node.getActualNamespaceNode().getName() !=
IASKeywordConstants.PUBLIC)
> > > > problems.add(new
ConstructorMustBePublicProblem(node.getActualNamespaceNode()));
> > > >
> > > > What is the CM or Code Model ?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Frédéric THOMAS
> > > >
> > > >> From: aharui@adobe.com
> > > >> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > > >> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> > > >> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 13:36:50 +0000
> > > >>
> > > >> Could you have an old guava.jar?
> > > >>
> > > >>> On 10/1/14 4:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Hi,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I built it with ANT an ran Falcon compc.bat from the
generated/dist/sdk,
> > > >>> does anyone knows why I get that ?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> > > >>> com/google/common/cache/CacheLoader
> > > >>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.MXMLC.<init>(MXMLC.java:379)
> > > >>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.<init>(COMPC.java:54)
> > > >>> at
> > > >>>
org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.staticMainNoExit(COMPC.java:75)
> > > >>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.main(COMPC.java:63)
> > > >>> Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
> > > >>> com.google.common.cache.CacheLoader
> > > >>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)
> > > >>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)
> > > >>> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
> > > >>> at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)
> > > >>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:424)
> > > >>> at sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:308)
> > > >>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
> > > >>> ... 4 more
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Thanks,
> > > >>> Frédéric THOMAS
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
>
[Falcon] Constructor NS (was: [Falcon] starting up)
Posted by Frédéric THOMAS <we...@hotmail.com>.
Hi,
I started to check if it was possible to have private and protected constructor in Falcon and I have to admit it was tricky especially because I never seen a compiler from inside before but it is apparently possible, I've been able to compile successfully:
package myLib {
public class CTORTest {
private var _p:int;
private function CTORTest(p:int) {
_p = p;
}
private function anotherFct():CTORTest {
return new CTORTest(10);
}
}
}
and using the compiled lib:
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<s:Application xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009" xmlns:s="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/spark" creationComplete="creationCompleteHandler(event)">
<fx:Script><![CDATA[
import mx.events.FlexEvent;
import myLib.CTORTest;
private function creationCompleteHandler(event:FlexEvent):void {
var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
}
]]></fx:Script>
</s:Application>
gives:
[Fault] exception, information=VerifyError: Error #1014: La classe myLib:CTORTest::CTORTest est introuvable. (not found) with the legacy compiler
and:
F:\sources\falconTestDrive\shell\src\Main.mxml:9
Erreur: Appel d'une méthode qui ne semble pas définie CTORTest. (Call to a undefined method)
var a:CTORTest = new CTORTest(1);
(I will customize the error message later)
I still need to check it works in the 3 possible ways to instantiate a Class [1] (at the moment it works only with 1st one), check that works with is / instanceOf, revisit the cast function accordingly and maybe other things not yet in my mind and especially check FP won't complain using it.
/* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), new_type_name, ContainerID(expression*)) */
/* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), expression, ContainerID(expression*)) */
/* expression = FunctionCallID(KeywordNewID(void), vector_literal, ContainerID(void)) */
In case all this works and I'm far to know it at the moment, I will have to think about implement "method overloading" otherwise I can't see any usage of a protected constructor and therefore will probably require some help for the best way to implement it.
Thanks,
Frédéric THOMAS
> From: webdoublefx@hotmail.com
> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [Falcon] starting up
> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 16:57:28 +0100
>
> Ah ok, thanks Gordon, I was tearing my hair out :-)
>
> Frédéric THOMAS
>
> > Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> > From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
> > Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 08:51:16 -0700
> > To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >
> > That comment is out of date. Code Model was the part of pre-Falcon Flash Builder that built an abstract syntax tree to support intelligent editing. We used it as the beginning of Falcon's lexer and parser. The code is just looking at the AST to see if the constructor has a non-public namespace.
> >
> > - Gordon
> >
> > > On Oct 1, 2014, at 8:33 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I updated it to v17.0 and check in falcon\compiler\generated\dist\sdk\lib\external, is there.
> > >
> > > oops, looking better, it has both, just removed the bad one, it runs.
> > >
> > > Now, looking at internal\as\codegen\ClassDirectiveProcessor.java, I see that:
> > >
> > > // If a constructor has a namespace as part of it's declaration, it must be declared public.
> > > // It is ok to omit the namespace
> > > // We must check the AST, as CM treats all ctors as public no matter what the user typed in
> > > // so the FunctionDefinition will always be in the public namespace
> > > if( node.getActualNamespaceNode() != null &&
> > > node.getActualNamespaceNode().getName() != IASKeywordConstants.PUBLIC)
> > > problems.add(new ConstructorMustBePublicProblem(node.getActualNamespaceNode()));
> > >
> > > What is the CM or Code Model ?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Frédéric THOMAS
> > >
> > >> From: aharui@adobe.com
> > >> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > >> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> > >> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 13:36:50 +0000
> > >>
> > >> Could you have an old guava.jar?
> > >>
> > >>> On 10/1/14 4:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Hi,
> > >>>
> > >>> I built it with ANT an ran Falcon compc.bat from the generated/dist/sdk,
> > >>> does anyone knows why I get that ?
> > >>>
> > >>> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> > >>> com/google/common/cache/CacheLoader
> > >>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.MXMLC.<init>(MXMLC.java:379)
> > >>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.<init>(COMPC.java:54)
> > >>> at
> > >>> org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.staticMainNoExit(COMPC.java:75)
> > >>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.main(COMPC.java:63)
> > >>> Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
> > >>> com.google.common.cache.CacheLoader
> > >>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)
> > >>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)
> > >>> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
> > >>> at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)
> > >>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:424)
> > >>> at sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:308)
> > >>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
> > >>> ... 4 more
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>> Frédéric THOMAS
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
RE: [Falcon] starting up
Posted by Frédéric THOMAS <we...@hotmail.com>.
Ah ok, thanks Gordon, I was tearing my hair out :-)
Frédéric THOMAS
> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> From: gsmithsf@hotmail.com
> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 08:51:16 -0700
> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>
> That comment is out of date. Code Model was the part of pre-Falcon Flash Builder that built an abstract syntax tree to support intelligent editing. We used it as the beginning of Falcon's lexer and parser. The code is just looking at the AST to see if the constructor has a non-public namespace.
>
> - Gordon
>
> > On Oct 1, 2014, at 8:33 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I updated it to v17.0 and check in falcon\compiler\generated\dist\sdk\lib\external, is there.
> >
> > oops, looking better, it has both, just removed the bad one, it runs.
> >
> > Now, looking at internal\as\codegen\ClassDirectiveProcessor.java, I see that:
> >
> > // If a constructor has a namespace as part of it's declaration, it must be declared public.
> > // It is ok to omit the namespace
> > // We must check the AST, as CM treats all ctors as public no matter what the user typed in
> > // so the FunctionDefinition will always be in the public namespace
> > if( node.getActualNamespaceNode() != null &&
> > node.getActualNamespaceNode().getName() != IASKeywordConstants.PUBLIC)
> > problems.add(new ConstructorMustBePublicProblem(node.getActualNamespaceNode()));
> >
> > What is the CM or Code Model ?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Frédéric THOMAS
> >
> >> From: aharui@adobe.com
> >> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> >> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 13:36:50 +0000
> >>
> >> Could you have an old guava.jar?
> >>
> >>> On 10/1/14 4:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I built it with ANT an ran Falcon compc.bat from the generated/dist/sdk,
> >>> does anyone knows why I get that ?
> >>>
> >>> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> >>> com/google/common/cache/CacheLoader
> >>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.MXMLC.<init>(MXMLC.java:379)
> >>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.<init>(COMPC.java:54)
> >>> at
> >>> org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.staticMainNoExit(COMPC.java:75)
> >>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.main(COMPC.java:63)
> >>> Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
> >>> com.google.common.cache.CacheLoader
> >>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)
> >>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)
> >>> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
> >>> at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)
> >>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:424)
> >>> at sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:308)
> >>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
> >>> ... 4 more
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Frédéric THOMAS
> >
> >
> >
Re: [Falcon] starting up
Posted by Gordon Smith <gs...@hotmail.com>.
That comment is out of date. Code Model was the part of pre-Falcon Flash Builder that built an abstract syntax tree to support intelligent editing. We used it as the beginning of Falcon's lexer and parser. The code is just looking at the AST to see if the constructor has a non-public namespace.
- Gordon
> On Oct 1, 2014, at 8:33 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I updated it to v17.0 and check in falcon\compiler\generated\dist\sdk\lib\external, is there.
>
> oops, looking better, it has both, just removed the bad one, it runs.
>
> Now, looking at internal\as\codegen\ClassDirectiveProcessor.java, I see that:
>
> // If a constructor has a namespace as part of it's declaration, it must be declared public.
> // It is ok to omit the namespace
> // We must check the AST, as CM treats all ctors as public no matter what the user typed in
> // so the FunctionDefinition will always be in the public namespace
> if( node.getActualNamespaceNode() != null &&
> node.getActualNamespaceNode().getName() != IASKeywordConstants.PUBLIC)
> problems.add(new ConstructorMustBePublicProblem(node.getActualNamespaceNode()));
>
> What is the CM or Code Model ?
>
> Thanks,
> Frédéric THOMAS
>
>> From: aharui@adobe.com
>> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
>> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 13:36:50 +0000
>>
>> Could you have an old guava.jar?
>>
>>> On 10/1/14 4:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I built it with ANT an ran Falcon compc.bat from the generated/dist/sdk,
>>> does anyone knows why I get that ?
>>>
>>> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
>>> com/google/common/cache/CacheLoader
>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.MXMLC.<init>(MXMLC.java:379)
>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.<init>(COMPC.java:54)
>>> at
>>> org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.staticMainNoExit(COMPC.java:75)
>>> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.main(COMPC.java:63)
>>> Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
>>> com.google.common.cache.CacheLoader
>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)
>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)
>>> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
>>> at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)
>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:424)
>>> at sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:308)
>>> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
>>> ... 4 more
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Frédéric THOMAS
>
>
>
RE: [Falcon] starting up
Posted by Frédéric THOMAS <we...@hotmail.com>.
I updated it to v17.0 and check in falcon\compiler\generated\dist\sdk\lib\external, is there.
oops, looking better, it has both, just removed the bad one, it runs.
Now, looking at internal\as\codegen\ClassDirectiveProcessor.java, I see that:
// If a constructor has a namespace as part of it's declaration, it must be declared public.
// It is ok to omit the namespace
// We must check the AST, as CM treats all ctors as public no matter what the user typed in
// so the FunctionDefinition will always be in the public namespace
if( node.getActualNamespaceNode() != null &&
node.getActualNamespaceNode().getName() != IASKeywordConstants.PUBLIC)
problems.add(new ConstructorMustBePublicProblem(node.getActualNamespaceNode()));
What is the CM or Code Model ?
Thanks,
Frédéric THOMAS
> From: aharui@adobe.com
> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [Falcon] starting up
> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 13:36:50 +0000
>
> Could you have an old guava.jar?
>
> On 10/1/14 4:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Hi,
> >
> >I built it with ANT an ran Falcon compc.bat from the generated/dist/sdk,
> >does anyone knows why I get that ?
> >
> >Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> >com/google/common/cache/CacheLoader
> > at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.MXMLC.<init>(MXMLC.java:379)
> > at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.<init>(COMPC.java:54)
> > at
> >org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.staticMainNoExit(COMPC.java:75)
> > at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.main(COMPC.java:63)
> >Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
> >com.google.common.cache.CacheLoader
> > at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)
> > at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)
> > at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
> > at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)
> > at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:424)
> > at sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:308)
> > at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
> > ... 4 more
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Frédéric THOMAS
>
Re: [Falcon] starting up
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
Could you have an old guava.jar?
On 10/1/14 4:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <we...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I built it with ANT an ran Falcon compc.bat from the generated/dist/sdk,
>does anyone knows why I get that ?
>
>Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
>com/google/common/cache/CacheLoader
> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.MXMLC.<init>(MXMLC.java:379)
> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.<init>(COMPC.java:54)
> at
>org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.staticMainNoExit(COMPC.java:75)
> at org.apache.flex.compiler.clients.COMPC.main(COMPC.java:63)
>Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
>com.google.common.cache.CacheLoader
> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)
> at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)
> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
> at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)
> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:424)
> at sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:308)
> at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:357)
> ... 4 more
>
>Thanks,
>Frédéric THOMAS