Remove some closure compiler hacks #8437
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…libraries means we can know at pre render time which library code is included
sbc100
approved these changes
Apr 11, 2019
| @@ -753,6 +753,7 @@ var LibraryGLFW = { | |||
|
|
|||
| event.preventDefault(); | |||
|
|
|||
| #if '$FS' in addedLibraryItems | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Interesting, I didn't know about this "preprocessor syntax"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, we made it possible to run arbitrary JS in the preprocessor, I think this was a few months ago.
VirtualTim
pushed a commit
to VirtualTim/emscripten
that referenced
this pull request
May 21, 2019
The hacks for GL are not just ugly, but also bad for code size in some cases, it turns out (apparently closure will not optimize as much in their presence). This is a step towards emscripten-core#8421, the changes for which end up causing closure to emit worse code if not for this PR.
VirtualTim
added a commit
to VirtualTim/emscripten
that referenced
this pull request
May 23, 2019
This reverts commit 0439bc1.
VirtualTim
added a commit
to VirtualTim/emscripten
that referenced
this pull request
May 23, 2019
This reverts commit 0439bc1.
kripken
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 16, 2019
…JS libraries we have not yet included anything from libraries, so we should not read addedLibraryItems
kripken
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 20, 2019
petersalomonsen
pushed a commit
to petersalomonsen/emscripten
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 22, 2019
…e#10058) * Revert part of emscripten-core#8437 - the glfw part was invalid, as when processing JS libraries we have not yet included anything from libraries, so we should not read addedLibraryItems * fix deps. fixes emscripten-core#10004 * ifdef FS code in glfw
belraquib
pushed a commit
to belraquib/emscripten
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 23, 2020
The hacks for GL are not just ugly, but also bad for code size in some cases, it turns out (apparently closure will not optimize as much in their presence). This is a step towards emscripten-core#8421, the changes for which end up causing closure to emit worse code if not for this PR.
belraquib
pushed a commit
to belraquib/emscripten
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 23, 2020
…e#10058) * Revert part of emscripten-core#8437 - the glfw part was invalid, as when processing JS libraries we have not yet included anything from libraries, so we should not read addedLibraryItems * fix deps. fixes emscripten-core#10004 * ifdef FS code in glfw
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The hacks for GL are not just ugly, but also bad for code size in some cases, it turns out (apparently closure will not optimize as much in their presence).
This is a step towards #8421, the changes for which end up causing closure to emit worse code if not for this PR.