Now that I've had time to think about this, it seems like it could really be a good thing. Adobe chose to link itself to the ECMAscript4 standard and from many responses I've read it guided their decisions on whether or not to do things ( private constructors anyone? ).
Perhaps now Actionscript can move in a new direction that allows some things that weren't going to be in the ES4 standard. Perhaps actionscript will link itself with some other future standard. The possibilities are plentiful. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "hank williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 1:39 PM, Johannes Nel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > annotations, packages what else? > > > > We dont know precisely, but Brendan Eich is telegraphing that it is > big steps backwards by saying the following: > > 1. Focus work on ES3.1 with full collaboration of all parties, and > target two interoperable implementations by early next year. > 2. Collaborate on the next step beyond ES3.1, which will include > syntactic extensions but which will be more modest than ES4 in both > semantic and syntactic innovation. > 3. Some ES4 proposals have been deemed unsound for the Web, and are > off the table for good: packages, namespaces and early binding. This > conclusion is key to Harmony. > 4. Other goals and ideas from ES4 are being rephrased to keep > consensus in the committee; these include a notion of classes based > on existing ES3 concepts combined with proposed ES3.1 extensions. > > > To me #4 the idea that classes work "the old way" is also a big deal, > though exactly what that means I am not entirely sure. AS3 changed its > class model in what I think was a good way. I'd hate to go back. > > Hank >
