You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to issues@royale.apache.org by GitBox <gi...@apache.org> on 2022/02/02 22:54:04 UTC
[GitHub] [royale-compiler] greg-dove opened a new issue #210: [JS] super setter expressions do not resolve to the value being set
greg-dove opened a new issue #210:
URL: https://github.com/apache/royale-compiler/issues/210
an expression similar to :
```
override public function set mySetter(value:Boolean):void{
this.something = super.mySetter = value;
}
```
(example is only for illustrative purposes)
does not currently work correctly with the current javascript output for super setter calls.
for another example see: https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/blob/1219425faa090aacf05fe940e88f6c68d93d206d/frameworks/projects/MXRoyale/src/main/royale/mx/controls/CheckBox.as#L255
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@royale.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [royale-compiler] joshtynjala commented on issue #210: [JS] super setter expressions do not resolve to the value being set
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
joshtynjala commented on issue #210:
URL: https://github.com/apache/royale-compiler/issues/210#issuecomment-1054696742
Since some conversation related to this issue is happening on the mailing list, here's a link to the thread so that anyone reading this on Github knows where to find it:
https://lists.apache.org/thread/p4o8kno69cg5nhwp1ptbopg0t83c5thq
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@royale.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [royale-compiler] joshtynjala closed issue #210: [JS] super setter expressions do not resolve to the value being set
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
joshtynjala closed issue #210:
URL: https://github.com/apache/royale-compiler/issues/210
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@royale.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [royale-compiler] joshtynjala commented on issue #210: [JS] super setter expressions do not resolve to the value being set
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
joshtynjala commented on issue #210:
URL: https://github.com/apache/royale-compiler/issues/210#issuecomment-1054564268
> I suspect this applies to any getter/setter property, and not only ones accessed using super.
Actually, it looks like I was wrong in that assumption. It appears that it fails with `super` specifically because it needs to call the setter directly. With `this` instead, it can use normal member access, so nothing special is needed there.
This:
```as3
this.something = super.mySetter = this.myOtherSetter = value;
```
Becomes this:
```js
this.com_example_MyClass_something = com.example.MyClass.superClass_.set__mySetter.apply(this, [ this.myOtherSetter = value]);
```
That should make it easier to fix, actually, since we should already have a special case for super setters, and all tweaks should be able to stay in that one place.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@royale.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [GitHub] [royale-compiler] joshtynjala commented on issue #210: [JS] super setter expressions do not resolve to the value being set
Posted by Josh Tynjala <jo...@bowlerhat.dev>.
> In Flex, aren't all setters defined as functions that don't return
anything? I wonder if more complex chained assignments are allowed
Yes, setters must have a return type of void. However, the Flex compiler
allows chained assignments with accessors. I assumed that meant that the
getter was called. However...
> I think in the AS VM, the value 10 is pushed on the stack and left on the
stack after the assignment so it can be assigned to the next thing in the
chain.
I did a quick test of a chained assignment with the Flex compiler and Flash
Player, and I can see the setter being called, but not the getter. The
original value is propagating, though, so I guess it must use the value
from the stack, like you said.
That will require a different approach.
--
Josh Tynjala
Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 11:46 AM Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid>
wrote:
> Interesting. In Flex, aren't all setters defined as functions that don't
> return anything? I wonder if more complex chained assignments are allowed:
>
> foo = 1 + bar = 10;
>
> If not (or maybe even if it does work), then maybe it is best to deal with
> this as an assignment pattern and not bother to generate code that returns
> a value which I suspect would be wasteful 99% of the time it isn't used in
> a chain assignment.
>
> I think in the AS VM, the value 10 is pushed on the stack and left on the
> stack after the assignment so it can be assigned to the next thing in the
> chain.
>
> HTH,
> -Alex
>
> On 2/28/22, 10:38 AM, "GitBox" <gi...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> joshtynjala commented on issue #210:
> URL:
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Froyale-compiler%2Fissues%2F210%23issuecomment-1054550835&data=04%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C585f7c9bbf31412ddc4e08d9fae993a6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637816703377905729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=%2FS%2FUXUvEuIUtGA3cOABVjsvn2%2FQ3RAFXdjRDQRrV1uc%3D&reserved=0
>
>
> I suspect this applies to any getter/setter property, and not only
> ones accessed using `super`.
>
> This seems to be how the JS code is generated:
>
> ```js
> this.com_example_MyClass_something =
> com.example.MyClass.superClass_.set__mySetter.apply(this, [ value] );
> ```
>
> It fails because the setter doesn't return anything. So I think
> that `undefined` would be assigned to `something`, instead of the value.
>
> The generated JS should probably be something like this instead:
>
> ```js
> com.example.MyClass.superClass_.set__mySetter.apply(this, [ value] )
> this.com_example_MyClass_something =
> com.example.MyClass.superClass_.get__mySetter.apply(this);
> ```
>
> However, I think that will be tricky to generate because I'm pretty
> sure that the emitter writes multiple assignments without looking ahead,
> and `this.com_example_MyClass_something` will already be be emitted before
> we even detect that there's a setter involved.
>
> It might not look pretty, but I think that we can use the [comma
> operator](
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdeveloper.mozilla.org%2Fen-US%2Fdocs%2FWeb%2FJavaScript%2FReference%2FOperators%2FComma_Operator&data=04%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C585f7c9bbf31412ddc4e08d9fae993a6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637816703377905729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=0BqmirUJ8UplBYGscHHaz5Laqp4fWW9VpNJgHGQzgkE%3D&reserved=0)
> to make this work. Probably safest with parentheses around the full
> expression.
>
> ```js
> this.com_example_MyClass_something =
> (com.example.MyClass.superClass_.set__mySetter.apply(this, [ value]),
> com.example.MyClass.superClass_.get__mySetter.apply(this));
> ```
>
>
> --
> This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
> To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
> URL above to go to the specific comment.
>
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@royale.apache.org
>
> For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
> users@infra.apache.org
>
>
>
>
Re: [GitHub] [royale-compiler] joshtynjala commented on issue #210: [JS] super setter expressions do not resolve to the value being set
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>.
Interesting. In Flex, aren't all setters defined as functions that don't return anything? I wonder if more complex chained assignments are allowed:
foo = 1 + bar = 10;
If not (or maybe even if it does work), then maybe it is best to deal with this as an assignment pattern and not bother to generate code that returns a value which I suspect would be wasteful 99% of the time it isn't used in a chain assignment.
I think in the AS VM, the value 10 is pushed on the stack and left on the stack after the assignment so it can be assigned to the next thing in the chain.
HTH,
-Alex
On 2/28/22, 10:38 AM, "GitBox" <gi...@apache.org> wrote:
joshtynjala commented on issue #210:
URL: https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Froyale-compiler%2Fissues%2F210%23issuecomment-1054550835&data=04%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C585f7c9bbf31412ddc4e08d9fae993a6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637816703377905729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=%2FS%2FUXUvEuIUtGA3cOABVjsvn2%2FQ3RAFXdjRDQRrV1uc%3D&reserved=0
I suspect this applies to any getter/setter property, and not only ones accessed using `super`.
This seems to be how the JS code is generated:
```js
this.com_example_MyClass_something = com.example.MyClass.superClass_.set__mySetter.apply(this, [ value] );
```
It fails because the setter doesn't return anything. So I think that `undefined` would be assigned to `something`, instead of the value.
The generated JS should probably be something like this instead:
```js
com.example.MyClass.superClass_.set__mySetter.apply(this, [ value] )
this.com_example_MyClass_something = com.example.MyClass.superClass_.get__mySetter.apply(this);
```
However, I think that will be tricky to generate because I'm pretty sure that the emitter writes multiple assignments without looking ahead, and `this.com_example_MyClass_something` will already be be emitted before we even detect that there's a setter involved.
It might not look pretty, but I think that we can use the [comma operator](https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdeveloper.mozilla.org%2Fen-US%2Fdocs%2FWeb%2FJavaScript%2FReference%2FOperators%2FComma_Operator&data=04%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C585f7c9bbf31412ddc4e08d9fae993a6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637816703377905729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=0BqmirUJ8UplBYGscHHaz5Laqp4fWW9VpNJgHGQzgkE%3D&reserved=0) to make this work. Probably safest with parentheses around the full expression.
```js
this.com_example_MyClass_something = (com.example.MyClass.superClass_.set__mySetter.apply(this, [ value]), com.example.MyClass.superClass_.get__mySetter.apply(this));
```
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@royale.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [royale-compiler] joshtynjala commented on issue #210: [JS] super setter expressions do not resolve to the value being set
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
joshtynjala commented on issue #210:
URL: https://github.com/apache/royale-compiler/issues/210#issuecomment-1054550835
I suspect this applies to any getter/setter property, and not only ones accessed using `super`.
This seems to be how the JS code is generated:
```js
this.com_example_MyClass_something = com.example.MyClass.superClass_.set__mySetter.apply(this, [ value] );
```
It fails because the setter doesn't return anything. So I think that `undefined` would be assigned to `something`, instead of the value.
The generated JS should probably be something like this instead:
```js
com.example.MyClass.superClass_.set__mySetter.apply(this, [ value] )
this.com_example_MyClass_something = com.example.MyClass.superClass_.get__mySetter.apply(this);
```
However, I think that will be tricky to generate because I'm pretty sure that the emitter writes multiple assignments without looking ahead, and `this.com_example_MyClass_something` will already be be emitted before we even detect that there's a setter involved.
It might not look pretty, but I think that we can use the [comma operator](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Operators/Comma_Operator) to make this work. Probably safest with parentheses around the full expression.
```js
this.com_example_MyClass_something = (com.example.MyClass.superClass_.set__mySetter.apply(this, [ value]), com.example.MyClass.superClass_.get__mySetter.apply(this));
```
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@royale.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org