Hi Alex, I'm strong advocate to make POCs in different directions so we could end getting more knowledge that could end turning all efforts in a real next generation framework. For that reason I think we'll end over the next year with various groups targeting different points of views: AS3, Haxe and so on, as well maintaining actual codebase
For me, in a full rewrite, the reason not to go AS3 is: * AS3 will be killed by its own evolution AS4 * AVM2 will be killed by its own evolution AVMNext * If we could get rid off Adobe's technologies, the better. It's not only because we, as an open source project, should not depend heavily on propietary technologies (if we can), it's because we have the experience on how Adobe throw the towel, and that makes a precedent, so they could make it again. Confidence in a future depending on Adobe is something that I would try to avoid if possible. * Haxe has the key points we are asking for: One language (OOP) - multiple targets. * Haxe will serve us next AS4/AVMNext without the need of change the language. * They already has the HTML5/JS output, the actual Flash AVM output, and all the mobile platforms output. ...of course all this have sense since the proposal is "a new Flex from scratch". Your point of "Haxe is not in Apache" is not a point for me. Take into account that we already use other open source projects that are not in apache. More over, Apache is an instrument right now and even for such new project, we could event think in go directly to Github, if after a few more trys we don't get git-github support or Apache bureaucracy is not as agile as we need. I'm with you that we should start coding and making more POC and not only talking, but In my case my next efforts as you saw will be in Git support, and need to learn more about Haxe to be able to start playing with all this ideas. 2012/11/21 Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> > > > > On 11/21/12 12:53 PM, "Kevin Newman" <capta...@unfocus.com> wrote: > > > But if we are to change languages, why not go with a language that, > > looks a lot like AS3 (and ports easy), addresses the language > > scalability issues of JavaScript (lack of classes, typing, a compiler, > > etc.), and can compile to JS as well as other languages? Haxe can be > > compiled into JS, ABC/SWF, C++, C#, etc. > My angle for now is not to change languages. We can write in AS3 and > cross-compile to JS and maybe other languages. Apache Flex effectively > owns > AS3 because it owns a compiler for it. > > > Why NOT use Haxe? > -Haxe is not in Apache. > -There are lots of existing AS3 code libraries I think we should try to > leverage. > -I know how AS3 behaves on Flash. > > But again, none of these, even in aggregate, are strong enough reasons to > a-priori say that some other group of folks shouldn't pursue a rewrite on > Haxe. > > -- > Alex Harui > Flex SDK Team > Adobe Systems, Inc. > http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui > > -- Carlos Rovira Director de Tecnología M: +34 607 22 60 05 F: +34 912 35 57 77 http://www.codeoscopic.com http://www.directwriter.es http://www.avant2.es
