Zwetan, While you the "trash" may have been a bit harsh... you were disseminating FUD about MTASC, a compiler that overall in a lot of peoples opinion is better than the Flash 8 AS3 Compiler and that's not cool! Like Nicolas mentioned, Adobe may take years to add these features and that is just plain annoying. What in the hell is taking them so long, the community could've made this happen years ago. but if your willing to wait, that is your prerogative.
-sam On Sep 12, 2007, at 10:12 AM, zwetan wrote: > 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
