On 2006-07-10, at 08:08 EDT, Henry Minsky wrote: > On 7/9/06, Jim Grandy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'm browsing > through the Legals sources this afternoon, and had some > comments: > > First, on the contents of WEB-INF/lps/lfc/kernel/swf. [...] > ++ OL class dependency in one kernel is going to require the same > dependency in all kernels, so we need a blanket policy one way or the > other; > > I don't quite understand this logic; it seems like having the AVM2 > kernel use the class system > doesn't mean that the AVM3 kernel must use it... > > > Rewriting the lzloader stuff without the class system would be a > an amount of work that I'm > not convinced it is worth doing unless there is a more immediate need.
Also, our core class system _is_ prototype-based inheritance, and it is written in Plain-Old-Javascript, so is completely portable. Maybe what Henry and I are arguing is that our core class system should be part of our kernel? _______________________________________________ Laszlo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-dev
