3 ms·
AS2 and 3 aren't much different in how their OO features are implemented. So to suggest that AS2's features are bolted on and AS3's aren't doesn't make much sen
by whordeley 18y ago
AS2 and 3 aren't much different in how their OO features are implemented. So to suggest that AS2's features are bolted on and AS3's aren't doesn't make much sense logically. Actually you've sort of implied that i am correct if you think about it. And why is it that AS3 conforming to the ECMA4 standard somehow gives it immunity to sucking?
- jetako 18y agoGotta differ with you on the OO point. There are quite a few fundamental differences, both in terms of low-level implementation and common usage. AS3 has true class-based object definition, packages and namespaces, for example. AS2's class support is merely an obfuscation of its underlying prototype system, whereas AS3 features real class objects, and prototypes exist only as an alternative inheritance mechanism. I'm curious what it is about AS3 OO that you perceive as bolted on. Seems pretty well rooted to me. Btw apologies for my brash tone before, that was a bit dickish.