I think we all know my views.
(1) Any implementation that does not suport taking a raw, existing zscript file, and processing it, in ZC, is out.
(2) I think that the engine needs heavy reworking before we consider changing the status quo.
(3) I do no tthink that the benefits of AS outweigh the implications of what adding it might do.
( a ) This includes the potential for an exponential number of new bugs.
( b) I do not think that the time involved* versus the benefit is a net gain.
(4) Any option that sacrifices compatibility of any sort, is to me, a bad idea. I do not mean quest binary compatibility, solely.
(5) I worry about the performance hit, which is likely to be notable.
(6) Moreover, I do not have the time to dedicate to properly learning the AS sources at present. i can work on ZC until, probably April. After that, I will likely have a six month or greater gap before I can focus on it readily, and I will be tapering off slowly toward April, as well. I expect it to take months for me to truly understand the AS underpinnings, so that's over a year before I could even know if I would want to work with it.
*I would expect to spent the time required to fully support cross-compiling with no syntax changes, and implement all of the existing features, or quirks. That kind of effort is absurd, and massive, when compared against what changing the engine gains for us. Anything short of this is just a sign that we lack the kind of dedication, or manpower, involved with the project to move it forward from its present engine condition.
This is something that we can still do, a few years down the road, if we still have an interest in it by then. With people actually working on the parser, and ZScript, most of what people want out of AS can be done with what we already have, with fewer risks, better stability, and better acceptance.
Please remember that the old 'plan' was to let us work on 2.x stuff, and make AS a 3.x thing that @Gleeok and @Saffith did, and that they supposedly weren't concerned with some compatibility rifts between these two branches of ZC. I have always wanted to ensure that new versions of the programme are compatible with all of the old materials, including scripts as raw files, not as assembly. I think that we have a plan now, we have focus, and we have people willing to do the work. Rocking the boat, for the fifth time, right now, is just madness.
This changed several times, with lack of communication being the underlying thorn. I'll also note, that seeing a working proof of concept is something I would need, to ultimately decide, but I'm just tired of the whole debate, and want to proceed with whatever amounts to our present, viable plan.
Reply With Quote