Hi List, Happy to see that the conversation is over :D hmm that's pitty, it's nothing to do with that :(
Selon zwetan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > 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 > _______________________________________________ osflash mailing list [email protected] http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
