2008 1:48 PM
> > To: CF-Community
> > Subject: Re: Javascript and Actionscript
> >
> > You obviously meant to type:
> > Javascript is painful, actionscript is fun. ;)
> >
> > I think Actionscript has gone beyond ECMA standards, haven't they?
>
> The s
> -Original Message-
> From: Deanna Schneider [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 1:48 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Javascript and Actionscript
>
> You obviously meant to type:
> Javascript is painful, actionscript is fun. ;)
>
t THAT many differences.
>
> either way, fuck both of em, they are both hard for me to write.
> i can READ and hack both, but both are quite hard for me to just write.
>
> ;( hmmmph
>
> On 3/25/08, Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:
> > How is it that Javascript
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How is it that Javascript and Actionscript are both versions of
> ECMAScript? Is the ECMAScript definition that open to interpretation?
>
> Javascript is dynamically typed, Actionscript is statically typed.
> Javascript has prototype based object
How is it that Javascript and Actionscript are both versions of
ECMAScript? Is the ECMAScript definition that open to interpretation?
Javascript is dynamically typed, Actionscript is statically typed.
Javascript has prototype based objects, Actionscript has a class based
approach.
Javascript
