Hi David,

in fact i also never understood the point of open source, until i was
able to tweak my favored actionscript compiler, MTASC that is.

The source of the compiler is a powerful addition to my toolset. It
allows me to introduce all kinds of additonal checks or code
transformations.
For example, at some point i needed to create intrinsic actionscript
classes. No problem with MTASC. Simply add a option to the compiler,
which alows me to specify a target directory and a new codegeneration
plugin and you are done. If i had to this from scratch, it would have
taken much longer.
I can't forsee all kinds of things people do with the compiler source,
but i think, some of them could be valuable additions to the plattform.

Cheers,
Ralf.


David Mendels wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I can say that the source code for the framework will be published. (Not
> necessarily under an open source license, but published so that folks
> can see it and understand it and extend it.)
> 
> As for the compiler, we don't have anything to announce at this time and
> I am not sure if we want to do this, but I'd be interested in practical
> suggestions from this list. Why should we do this? How would you use it?
> How important is it--not just to be open source for the sake of it, but
> actually for getting your work--whatever that is--accomplished?  There
> are many licenses and approaches folks take, which ones do you think
> would make sense here?
> 
> 
> -David 
> 
> 
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nicolas Cannasse
>>Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 3:27 AM
>>To: Open Source Flash Mailing List
>>Subject: Re: [osflash] Free compiler (was FW: [Fwd: Re: MTASC Future])
>>
>>David Mendels wrote:
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>A few months ago, Claus wrote on this list: "unless macromedia 
>>>releases their compiler for free (unlikely)"
>>
>>Hi David,
>>
>>I would prefer "free as in freedom" than "free as is beer", 
>>but that's already something good ;) If you don't seel it 
>>anymore, it there any point in keeping the compiler sources 
>>closed ? People might like to study, improve, and customize 
>>it for specific needs. Of course this would reveal the 
>>bytecode format of the 8.5 Player, but some people are 
>>already working on that issue.
>>
>>Best,
>>Nicolas
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>osflash mailing list
>>[email protected]
>>http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
>>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> osflash mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org



_______________________________________________
osflash mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org

Reply via email to