Comments on: ActionScript Modifiers Summary page and ActionScript 4.0 wishlist

By: elad.ny

elad.ny — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 13:57:59 +0000

Good point Chris, method overloading would be a great addition to AS. Regarding ECMAScript, according to Wikipedia AS3/Flex is based on ECMA-262, edition 3 (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECMAScript).

By: Chris Luebcke

Chris Luebcke — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 08:06:41 +0000

Thanks for the good summary. I wish I could add method overloading to the wish list, but that was torpedoed by the adoption of the …rest argument. You can’t disambiguate

function a() : void;
function b(x : int) : void;
function c(x : int, y : int) : void;

If you might also have

function d(…rest) : void;

Oh well, Sometimes sending a configured Object is more useful, anyway.

elad.ny: ActionScript 3 is not ECMAScript compatible, either, so we’re not losing much there. Plus it sounds like the working group pretty much self-destructed, for which Adobe can be held only partly to blame. This is why these organizations tend to go a full decade before major releases.

By: elad.ny

elad.ny — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 02:02:07 +0000

Actionscript 4 will not be ECMAScript compatible, and will allow Adobe to get “out of the box” and take the language to the next level. I believe, we will see improvements in modifiers.

By: Xegnma

Xegnma — Sun, 15 Feb 2009 19:41:15 +0000

I second your vote for Private Class Constructors.