+1 for method overloading from me too And:
+1 for private/protected constructors :-) -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Frédéric THOMAS [mailto:webdoubl...@hotmail.com] Gesendet: Sonntag, 3. Februar 2013 05:16 An: dev@flex.apache.org Betreff: Re: Language features Nick, +1 or even 10 -Fred -----Message d'origine----- From: Nicholas Kwiatkowski Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2013 6:58 PM To: dev@flex.apache.org Subject: Re: Language features I'd be fairly excited to see method overloading. It's one of the things I miss from Java... -Nick On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 12:17 PM, Avi Kessner <akess...@gmail.com> wrote: > If it was up to me, I would vote against method overloading. I think > that's a code smell personally. > > brought to you by the letters A, V, and I and the number 47 > > > On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 7:05 PM, Frédéric THOMAS <webdoubl...@hotmail.com > >wrote: > > > Hi Gordon, > > > > > > Adding abstract classes and private constructors to Falcon should be > easy > >> > > > > That's a good news, at this point protected constructor would be > > welcomed > > as well as private constructors are commonly used in classes that > > contain > > static members only. > > > > And I voting +1 for the rest :-) you gonna make happy a lot of people > > who > > wait for a long time for these features. > > > > -Fred > > > > -----Message d'origine----- From: Gordon Smith > > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 7:38 PM > > To: dev@flex.apache.org > > Subject: RE: Language features > > > > > > Adding abstract classes and private constructors to Falcon should be > easy. > > Adding generics and method overloading would be considerably harder but > > probably doable after a lot of design. Two other features worth > considering > > are strong function types (i.e., a type like (int, int):String for a > > function that takes two ints and returns a String) and strongly-typed > fixed > > arrays (i.e., int[]). > > > > I'm going to continue to focus on MXML. Until it is finished, we can't > > move from the old compiler to the new one. I don't recommend making any > > modifications to the old compiler. > > > > - Gordon > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Frédéric THOMAS [mailto:webdoublefx@hotmail.**com< > webdoubl...@hotmail.com> > > ] > > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 3:07 AM > > To: dev@flex.apache.org > > Subject: Re: Language features > > > > +1 Nick > > > > May be possible, I don't know, time ago, I looked at adding the > > possibility to have the constructor accepting other NS than public to > > simulate abstract classes and seen 2 places where it was checked but > didn't > > dare to change it besause I didn't know the impacts, I hope someone > better > > than me here can take care of it, compiler geeks, are you here ? > > > > -Fred > > > > -----Message d'origine----- > > From: Nick Collins > > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 11:24 AM > > To: dev@flex.apache.org > > Subject: Language features > > > > With the cancellation of AVM next, should we perhaps look at adding some > > additional language features to our compiler? > > > > As I think about some of the features I would like to see, such as > > abstract classes, generics, method overloading, etc. it seems to me that > at > > least some of them could be implemented into our compiler? > > > > Nick > > > > >
