On 9/12/07, Nicolas Cannasse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
>
> > using namespace to configure a program is much better
> > than to use #define, #ifdef and #undef
> > for one good example about using that unorthodox feature
>
> I would say that's a matter of taste. #ifdef is a lot more powerful when
> you want to do debugging, because the code is completely removed from
> the SWF when you compile.
>

well from my taste, #ifdef is ugly and should be avoided like hell


> > you should definitively spend more time on the ES4 wiki
> >
> > you missed that
> > http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=proposals:type_parameters
> [...]
>
> I did spent some time on the wiki, and I already had some talks with
> Brendan Eich. As for as I know, all of these are "proposals" that are
> not yet part of the current specification. You're lucky if you can wait
> a few years (AS4,AS5, or AS6) to get these features. As for my company,
> we need them right now, and that's why we made haXe.

look you don't add those features in haXe following either thespec or
the proposals of
the ES4 spec right ?

then haXe , even if it may look like ActionScript, is simply a
different language,
different features set, etc.

that's all I'm saying.


>
> > it's like all the whinners complaining about
> > "bouhouhou you don't have private class in AS3, it sucks"
> > they just don't realize that Adobe decided on purpose to avoid
> > to add features to AS3 that will end to be incompatible with the
> > final ES4 spec
> > they did a pretty good job even if some incompabilities will remain
>
> So what you're saying is :
>  - AS3 is not 100% compatible with ES4
>  - ES4 is not yet finished
>  - there will be an AS4 in the future, with incompatible changes wrt AS3
>

you're missing my point on purpose

some incompatibilities that if you followed some link I provided
have workaround, they are not blocker

my point was about the choice of Adobe to not implement a private class
because this could be a real blocker in the long run


> >> Now, if you look for example at haXe from a programming language
> >> features point of view, you'll find a mature and professional language
> >> that targets Flash Player 6-9 and offer far more possibilities than AS3.
> >>
> >
> > yeah right...
> >
> > we already got this discussion numerous times
> >
> > no, I will not use or even study a language that is not based on a 
> > specification
> > it's just a pure waste of time
> > ( I mean a real spec, not a I-add-any-feature-that-I-want-when-I-feel-to 
> > spec)
>
> Most of the programming languages don't have a specification. Some
> popular examples are perl, php, ruby, ... Saying that they are not worth
> learning because of this seems a bit strange at least.
>

no, I'm saying that I trust more the ECMA TG1 people to come up
with languages features that I will like (and form the proposals etc.
I know I already like)
than you to come up with such features.

> Specifications are in generaly made by commercial vendors in order to be
> able to develop different compilers that can interop with each other.
> The truth is that most languages having an open source compiler doesn't
> need a specification since there's one single compiler available for
> everyone.
>

yeah right...how convenient
again I'm not gonna to oppose commercial vendors to open source group,
it make no sens,
my point is I do like a lot what the Adobe guys, the Mozilla guys etc.
have made with the ES4 spec, that's it, I don't care if they do it for
commercial
reason or not.


> Also, all the programming languages are developed by people that made
> choices about what to add or not to the language, with a rationale
> behind each choice. I don't see how a specification change something
> about this.
>

let's say that I don't like your choices

> You're of course welcome to disagree with the set of features that makes
> the haXe language, and not use it because of this. Simply, doesn't trash
> other people work for your own pleasure without any meaningful argument.
> And also stop the FUD with MTASC.

I didn't trash any people work

this conversation is over.

zwetan

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

Reply via email to