Convergence options for Ecmascript/Actionscript?
taka at gigafied.com
Sun Sep 2 17:20:48 PDT 2012
For what it's worth, I did AS3 development for a long time before somewhat
(within the last year and a half) switching over to more primarily
I still do stuff in Flash/AS3 too, so I have a foot in both doors.
When I first made the switch, I looked at the transition from AS3 to JS as a
downgrade of sorts, wishing I could do some of the things in JS that I
in AS3. The switch from Classical inheritance to prototypical inheritance
probably the biggest adjustment.
Now that I've been working in JS for over a year and a half. I find that I
2. getting feedback from AS3 developers: did they really need the
> extra features that ES.nexts are not going to have, what was their
> experience with the features that AS3 has in some form and ES6
> is going to have in some other form. And do those who went
> through the AS3 to ES5 transition have useful observations?
To get to the point, developers are always going to prefer what they are
used to, unless they have experience with both A and B, asking them
which is better is not going to be helpful and may even send you in the
you can get will be from other JS developers, not from developers who use
Haxe or any other language.
With the above in mind, I think the current approach for ES.next (from what
is more about making things easier with syntax and fixing things which are
pretty obviously not ideal (no lexical scope for methods), vs. adding new
to the language, which I think is definitely the right thing to do.
On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 4:41 PM, Peter van der Zee <ecma at qfox.nl> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 2:30 AM, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.org> wrote:
> > You really should read back in es-discuss if you have time (understand if
> > you don't!). We covered what made ES4 fail. The main problem was
> > upon which packages were built.
> > Unfortunately, AS3 uses namespaces and packages heavily. Mozilla's
> > project includes an AS3 bytecode recompiler that generates JS, and we
> > lower namespaces to anything native and JIT-optimized in JS itself.
> > Tobias in case he can comment.
> Fwiw, in our as3vm we solved the namespace problem by prefixing all
> properties with a namespace and an arbitrary separator (that would be
> illegal in regular identifiers). But there are more issues in "as3 vs
> es" than namespaces. For example: implicit instance closures (x=a.foo;
> implicitly binds x to a) and that pesky `"foo" === new String("foo")`
> rule (true in as3, false in es). There are more obviously, these are
> the ones that blew my mind when I encountered them. The implicit bind
> is really annoying to cover completely in js :/
> So I agree with the sentiment that ES won't easily (re)connect with
> as3. Especially when Adobe is working on an as4 that's even more
> disconnected (as Avik mentioned above). And that's their prerogative,
> - peter
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss