No need to instantiate a class to Try Haxe

[tariqbenezza]

During my first steps in Try Haxe I waste a lot of time to undertand why something like

for (i in [1, 2, 3]) { trace(i); }

was not working.

Indeed, I didn't know that you have to instantiate a class to Try Haxe ;)

Now it's implicit

[clemos]

It would be nice to have a checkbox / flag for that (like [ ] script mode or something), because your detection could be quite random:

trace("class"); // ouch
elem.className += "some-stuff"; // ouch

Also, please rebase.

[clemos]

Also, you should move your isScript check right after checkMacros(source)

[clemos]

Well done :) I'll probably release it this week end :D

[markknol]

I didn't know that you have to instantiate a class to Try Haxe ;)

Why didn't you, I mean every example has a class. I do like the feature, but I wonder if it isn't weird to hide this while "normal" Haxe requires a class?

[clemos]

@markknol I wasn't too sure about this feature either (see previous comment about checkbox), but I must say it makes a lot of sense, especially for smaller snippets (code.haxe.org or haxe manual ?).

Next steps I thought of (to be discussed ;)):

• maybe add a header like the following, for even easier copy/paste from JS (poke @matthijskamstra :+1:)

  #if js
  import js.Browser.*
  #end

• allow imports in scripts (skip import lines in detection, reinject them before main class)

• add a notification / warning that it's indeed not a complete Haxe module, with button or link to expand to the real underlying Haxe module.

[clemos]

So, FYI, I've done the first *, and all is online :D