I've been playing with the flex bundles for a while now. It looks like there are lots of different ways of building Flex at this
point. I've been using rake:
http://theblogthatnoonereads.tunasoft.com/2007/04/29/building-flex-on-rails/
Yes, there's a lot of ways to invoke mxmlc/compc. Ideally I'd like to see just one build and one run command in the ActionScript 3 bundle but don't want to impose a particular method. Currently there is:
mxmlc Ant fsch (A wrapper for mxmlc which caches the build in RAM and dramatically speeds up compilation - on my current project mxmlc takes 20+ seconds, with fsch this comes down to 4-5 seconds) Shell - project specific custom file.
I'd imagine that we could quickly add rake and yaml to the equation too. Does anyone have any suggestions of a way to handle this? Would it be best to add the various build methods as templates then check for custom build scrips within a TM project before defaulting to a basic build? Are there any other bundle developers who've solved a similar problem?
Cheers, Simon
On May 15, 2007, at 5:35 AM, Simon Gregory wrote:
I've been playing with the flex bundles for a while now. It looks like there are lots of different ways of building Flex at this
point. I've been using rake:
http://theblogthatnoonereads.tunasoft.com/2007/04/29/building-flex- on-rails/
Yes, there's a lot of ways to invoke mxmlc/compc. Ideally I'd like to see just one build and one run command in the ActionScript 3 bundle but don't want to impose a particular method. Currently there is:
mxmlc Ant fsch (A wrapper for mxmlc which caches the build in RAM and dramatically speeds up compilation - on my current project mxmlc takes 20+ seconds, with fsch this comes down to 4-5 seconds) Shell - project specific custom file.
I'd imagine that we could quickly add rake and yaml to the equation too. Does anyone have any suggestions of a way to handle this? Would it be best to add the various build methods as templates then check for custom build scrips within a TM project before defaulting to a basic build? Are there any other bundle developers who've solved a similar problem?
Cheers, Simon
All my projects use custom build scripts in the project root. We have a custom Logger class with a custom ruby server that communicate back and forth. I wrote a simple command that uses the Textmate.system javascript hook to call it and write the results back to the html output menu as if it was a terminal window.
That command is available in my personal (and rather outdated now) as3 bundle. All the CrazyEgg 2.0 team (me + two other dudes) are using my custom bundle right now. http://textmate.svn.subtlegradient.com/Bundles/Actionscript%203%20% 5BsG%5D.tmbundle http://textmate.svn.subtlegradient.com/Bundles/Actionscript%203%20% 5bsG%5d.tmbundle/Commands/Actionscript%20Runner.tmCommand
For any other projects I work on that don't require a custom server to be running or any strange custom build junk, I'd like it to fallback to the fastest and best compilation that my system can handle.
fsch sounds best if it's installed, otherwise fallback to simply mxmlc.
I'd still leave the other build commands in there for people who need them, but I'd have a single command that tries a custom build script then fsch then finally falls back mxmlc. Bind that to ⌘B and you've got yourself the perfect build command.
thomas Aylott — subtleGradient — CrazyEgg — sixteenColors
On 15. May 2007, at 11:35, Simon Gregory wrote:
[...] there's a lot of ways to invoke mxmlc/compc. Ideally I'd like to see just one build and one run command in the ActionScript 3 bundle but don't want to impose a particular method. Currently there is:
mxmlc Ant fsch (A wrapper for mxmlc which caches the build in RAM and dramatically speeds up compilation - on my current project mxmlc takes 20+ seconds, with fsch this comes down to 4-5 seconds) Shell - project specific custom file.
I'd imagine that we could quickly add rake and yaml to the equation too. [...]
Rake and Ant are general build systems and should have their own bundles, like we have one for Makefiles and another one for Xcode project files.
I know Java presently has an Ant build command and Ruby has the Rake build, but if the build systems are used for other source types, we should factor it out, rather than duplicate.
In 2.0 TM it will be possible to have some extra project attributes in the scope, making it possible for TM to figure out (via scope selectors) what build system should actually get the ⌘B/⌘R key equivalent -- for now though, it shouldn’t be too big a problem for a user to maybe change the scope selector of Make’s Build command to include his file types.
Does anyone have any suggestions of a way to handle this? Would it be best to add the various build methods as templates then check for custom build scrips within a TM project before defaulting to a basic build? Are there any other bundle developers who've solved a similar problem?
I think what Thomas proposes is the proper scheme, i.e. have one command that first tries fsch, then falls back on mxmlc.
I am not sure what the custom shell script covers. Is there a de facto standard for having custom shell scripts to build the project?
-
Allan Odgaard -
Simon Gregory -
Thomas Aylott (subtleGradient)