Really thought-provoking comment, Tom. While I do think that AS 2 is a big improvement over AS 1, I too am a bit perplexed by the need for AS 3 at this point in time. It seems like MM/Adobe is trying to build something just like Java that isn't Java, and I'm not sure what exactly the point of that is. If they're really going to revamp everything, I wonder if it would have been better to take the .NET approach, and let people develop Flash in several programming languages.
Also, part of the beauty of AS as it is now is that you can be more or less strict depending on you project. So for a simple prototype, I might write everything with procedural code on Frame 1, and not even deal with Classes, and not worry about declaring data types. -Adam Tom George wrote: >In many ways, AS and JavaScript, let's just say ECMAscript, is >possibly the most successful and unlikely OO language ever. It lacks, >shall we say, symmetry, elegance, and power (or scalability), but in >many ways supports more pure OO concepts than AS2++ or even Java. And >it's very accessible for people who do not have extensive training in >programming, i.e. the vast majority of Flash developers. > >Many of the complaints that I hear about AS1, and therefore the >reasons why AS2 and presumably AS3 are better, were things that could >have been fixed by themselves without resorting to extending the >language. In fact, simply a more strict adherence to the ECMA >standard (esp. with respect to behaviors around the undefined type) >would have made AS1 a more development friendly language. > >In some ways, the push to AS2 and beyond seems to be the result of >serious programmers (like many of us on this list) delving into this >great technology. But I question whether we didn't bring too many of >our Java and C++ techniques and expectations with us. When I look at >the MM V2 component architecture, what I see is a Java or C++ >approach to a UI class hierarchy. And the use of fairly clever OO >techniques in a situation where they are not actually necessary. > >I see the benefit in overhauling the Flash VM to get rid some of some >historic artifacts and baggage. And it's clear that MM is looking for >"serious programmer" or "enterprise" credibility for Flash, so I >wonder if it wouldn't have been better simply to make the language >Java instead of this not quite so easy to use ActionScript that looks >and acts and reads a lot like Java. > >Personally I would have settled for an improved AS1 and fixes to the >Flash authoring environment that would have made something like MTASC >unnecessary. > >OK, so now I can be tied to the stake too. > > >-Tom > >-- > >Tom George >http://www.designaxiom.com > > >_______________________________________________ >osflash mailing list >[email protected] >http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org > > > -- Adam Pasztory http://www.pasz.com _______________________________________________ osflash mailing list [email protected] http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
