On 10/13/16, 3:20 PM, "Jason Taylor" <ja...@dedoose.com> wrote:

>Hi Harbs, I honestly don't see how the language can move forward when the
>goal of FlexJS is to be able to compile to swf.  As long as we are stuck
>with that baggage implementing async / await and other parallel
>processing operations won't be possible without breaking the swf
>compatibility and fracturing FlexJS.  That's where the crux of my
>disagreement with the team is.  I don't believe compiling to swf is
>important in the long term, and by binding ourselves to that we are
>limiting out future drastically.  In a few years I don't think an
>application developer will be willing to switch framework platform
>without async / await, generics, or lamda's.  I am excited about FlexJS,
>but honestly I hope it's ported over to a better language system like
>typescript or dart.   The world needs a great rapid application
>development framework with a declarative UI language, but the world
>dosen't need SWF's in the future.

Compiling to SWF isn't a requirement for FlexJS.  I still think it is a
good thing so all our current SWCs can run as SWF.  Having runtime
type-checking is important as applications grow in complexity and are
developed by remote development teams.

But even if it was a requirement, TypeScript and Dart for JS all run on
top of JS, so my understanding is that any new language constructs they
offer can be implemented on top of Flash as well, although you might give
up runtime type-checking for those new language features.

And there is nothing stopping anyone from building a version of the
compiler that handles TS or Dart instead of AS.  Its all open-source.

Reply via email to