Closed issuesbot closed 11 years ago
[comment from ncanna...@gmail.com, published at 03/12/2010, 11:04:00] Float variables are usually well-typed. Could you send the smallest reproducible example possible that still show the issue ?
[comment from glidiast...@gmail.com, published at 15/12/2010, 15:45:55] Well, my SWC export goes like this:
Haxe:
public static function createFromBuffer(polyCount:Int, polyBuffer:Vector
to
Flash SWC:
public static function createFromBuffer(polyCount:int, polyBuffer:Vector.<_>, pointBuffer:Vector.<_>, pointCounts:Vector.
[comment from glidiast...@gmail.com, published at 15/12/2010, 16:36:52] Hmm.. managed to compile. But i removed some Flash.memory reference which might have been causing some issues with it. (not sure if that triggered the problem).
Well i think it works okay now, and Vector.
despite the [model]
public static function createFromBuffer(polyCount:int, polyBuffer:Vector.<_>, pointBuffer:Vector.<_>, pointCounts:Vector.
[comment from ncanna...@gmail.com, published at 17/12/2010, 14:45:48] I confirm this is a FlashDevelop issue : all Vector type parameters seems to be displayed as * instead of Number.
[Google Issue #244 : https://code.google.com/p/haxe/issues/detail?id=244] by glidiast...@gmail.com, at 03/12/2010, 04:25:50 I often like to see the decompiled code output to see how Haxe processes inlined stuff.
The compiled input: static function main()
The decompiled output:
// end function
Does this really mean that Float variables returned by inline methods are actually untyped? Or is it an illusion/code obsfucation done on Haxe part against decompilers? Does inlining actually makes things slower as a result? I know it may create more variables if you're not careful, but in this case, it's not more variables, just an untyped variable i'm concerned about.