<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: ActionScript3 preprocessing</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2006/02/27/actionscript3-preprocessor/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2006/02/27/actionscript3-preprocessor/</link>
	<description>Actionscript3, Flash, Scala, Java, C#, C++, Algorithms &#38; Imageprocessing</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 05 Feb 2012 21:26:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: klk</title>
		<link>http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2006/02/27/actionscript3-preprocessor/comment-page-1/#comment-170679</link>
		<dc:creator>klk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2009 22:39:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.je2050.de/?p=56#comment-170679</guid>
		<description>Hi,

If i interpret your solution correctly, this will change the default build process in Flex builder to the following:

1. Copy all files somewhere
2. Run preprocessor over all the files
3. Compile
4. Copy all original files back

How does this affect debugging/breakpoints in Flex Builder? If you put a breakpoint in the file, it&#039;s looking at the unpreprocessed version but the compiled SWF uses the preprocessed version. Does this cause any discrepancies or weird behavior?

Thanks!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi,</p>
<p>If i interpret your solution correctly, this will change the default build process in Flex builder to the following:</p>
<p>1. Copy all files somewhere<br />
2. Run preprocessor over all the files<br />
3. Compile<br />
4. Copy all original files back</p>
<p>How does this affect debugging/breakpoints in Flex Builder? If you put a breakpoint in the file, it&#8217;s looking at the unpreprocessed version but the compiled SWF uses the preprocessed version. Does this cause any discrepancies or weird behavior?</p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: joa</title>
		<link>http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2006/02/27/actionscript3-preprocessor/comment-page-1/#comment-168210</link>
		<dc:creator>joa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2009 08:46:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.je2050.de/?p=56#comment-168210</guid>
		<description>Google, &quot;c preprocessor&quot;, first result. Wasn&#039;t so hard, was it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Google, &#8220;c preprocessor&#8221;, first result. Wasn&#8217;t so hard, was it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eli</title>
		<link>http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2006/02/27/actionscript3-preprocessor/comment-page-1/#comment-168055</link>
		<dc:creator>Eli</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Apr 2009 00:36:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.je2050.de/?p=56#comment-168055</guid>
		<description>Hello!
Sounds interesting and usefull but the article is missing a HUGE thing:
Where do I get that &quot;cpp preprocessor&quot; from !?!??!?!

&quot;... that Chambers talks about. Google will be your friend..&quot;

Doesn&#039;t help a bit.
He doesn&#039;t give any name as far as I see, nor a link.

Also - did you think of that &quot;cpp preprocessor&quot; is a problematic name since &quot;cpp&quot; is equal to &quot;c++&quot; which is a far more common expression that google will consider?

Thanks (: but no thanks :(</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello!<br />
Sounds interesting and usefull but the article is missing a HUGE thing:<br />
Where do I get that &#8220;cpp preprocessor&#8221; from !?!??!?!</p>
<p>&#8220;&#8230; that Chambers talks about. Google will be your friend..&#8221;</p>
<p>Doesn&#8217;t help a bit.<br />
He doesn&#8217;t give any name as far as I see, nor a link.</p>
<p>Also &#8211; did you think of that &#8220;cpp preprocessor&#8221; is a problematic name since &#8220;cpp&#8221; is equal to &#8220;c++&#8221; which is a far more common expression that google will consider?</p>
<p>Thanks (: but no thanks :(</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Taylor</title>
		<link>http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2006/02/27/actionscript3-preprocessor/comment-page-1/#comment-165706</link>
		<dc:creator>Taylor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2009 01:08:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.je2050.de/?p=56#comment-165706</guid>
		<description>The as3pp link isn&#039;t working for me anymore, but your article piqued my interest.  Any chance you could repost it please?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The as3pp link isn&#8217;t working for me anymore, but your article piqued my interest.  Any chance you could repost it please?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris</title>
		<link>http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2006/02/27/actionscript3-preprocessor/comment-page-1/#comment-106432</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 May 2008 16:42:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.je2050.de/?p=56#comment-106432</guid>
		<description>Interesting howto, but where&#039;s the source to as3pp? Are proprocessors really so complicated that you feel the need to keep it closed source?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting howto, but where&#8217;s the source to as3pp? Are proprocessors really so complicated that you feel the need to keep it closed source?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: More Flexible Builder</title>
		<link>http://blog.joa-ebert.com/2006/02/27/actionscript3-preprocessor/comment-page-1/#comment-80617</link>
		<dc:creator>More Flexible Builder</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Apr 2008 11:22:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.je2050.de/?p=56#comment-80617</guid>
		<description>I have tryed the preprocessor integration but it produces a file with zero length. I used the latest versions of MinGW and Cygwin cpp-preprocessor.

I also ran the contents of pp0 command manually: 
&quot;cpp -P -include include.h file file&quot;. When the input and output file are the same, the command produces empty file.

Could you release the source code for pp0 and pp1 (if it is written in c/c++). I also need to add preprocessing for mxml-files.

Thank you</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have tryed the preprocessor integration but it produces a file with zero length. I used the latest versions of MinGW and Cygwin cpp-preprocessor.</p>
<p>I also ran the contents of pp0 command manually:<br />
&#8220;cpp -P -include include.h file file&#8221;. When the input and output file are the same, the command produces empty file.</p>
<p>Could you release the source code for pp0 and pp1 (if it is written in c/c++). I also need to add preprocessing for mxml-files.</p>
<p>Thank you</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

