Hello Nicolas,
Thank you, I can only speak on my behalf but I think its a very nice
post. I have tried to get into haXe in the beginning and was thrilled
but I was never able to get the companies I worked in to use haXe. I
know that haXe has a lot of features that AS3 doesn't have. Particularly
"using" is just plain awesome. Others are debatable like
typedef+interfaces or the notation for properties.
However I used ActionScript a lot in the past years and found ways to
work with it that are unlike the work with haXe because when I recently
tried out haXe again I was bothered by a few language features that I
use heavily in ActionScript and have not found a good equivalent in haXe
(in other words: they are missing in haXe - aren't they?):
*) Standalone variables/constants/function files outside of a class
context. I found them very liberating and as far as I can tell: haXe
only allows class/ENum/ alike.
*) e4x: Its such a pleasure to use in AS3.
*) Default initialized properties:
class ABC {
public var x: int = 1;
}
*) Working "this" in function references: Using function references
has become such a normal thing in AS3 that I wouldn't know how to
implement a similar design with without them.
*) Namespaces: While I don't "like" namespaces particularly, porting
Flex to haXe might be difficult without it.
There are other features in the compiler that are worth talking about
that I am sure would be reasonable to continue having in Flex.
*) Compiling the "asdoc" to different locales
*) Documentation on Meta-tags
*) Binding
*) Assets (Fonts!) loaded compiled through meta-data
Have there been discussions about this points in the haXe community?
yours
Martin.
