Mailing-List: contact flex-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of rick.winscot@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.210.47 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CALorpXfVdnFH0VpcEPz5z+31QdrkssfjkHnWVK6omx7nfOghuw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <034401ccd45e$621242c0$2636c840$@davidarno.org>
	<4F1439FD.4020800@leichtgewicht.at>
	<CALorpXec70m=jyffiY=WbYp+s47fJK-89fe7KVX+Q3M0U0iCfA@mail.gmail.com>
	<034f01ccd460$e2d599a0$a880cce0$@davidarno.org>
	<CALorpXfVdnFH0VpcEPz5z+31QdrkssfjkHnWVK6omx7nfOghuw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 18:50:50 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CAGjXta5tnMCBZhYuN0oVBfqDf5akNtBLVM513bj_dnBHqWzyDA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: AS3 Enhancements: method overloading. Why do people want this?
From: Rick Winscot <rick.winscot@gmail.com>
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8ff255c65ed40004b6ade274

--e89a8ff255c65ed40004b6ade274
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Static instances will always be less expensive at runtime over stack
allocations.
 On Jan 16, 2012 10:28 AM, "Nicholas Kwiatkowski" <nicholas@spoon.as> wrote:

> Sure -- but you would remove compile-time checking and optimization, which
> has some performance impacts (this moves the object type checks to runtime,
> vs. compile time, at a performance determent).  That would
> move convenience over performance, where if you allow overloading, the two
> would be equal.
>
> I'm not saying we would be able to accomplish anything we can't today --
> but it would be much more convenient for some to have it available as a
> resource.
>
> -Nick
>
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:09 AM, David Arno <david@davidarno.org> wrote:
>
> > > From: Nicholas Kwiatkowski [mailto:nicholas@spoon.as]
> > > Sent: 16 January 2012 15:02
> >
> > > public function sendAsString(stringToSend:String):bool
> > > public function sendAsBool(boolToSend:Boolean):bool
> > > public function sendAsArray(arrayToSend:Array):bool
> > > public function sendAsInt(intToSend:int):bool ...
> >
> > Could you not just have:
> >
> > public function send(value:*):Boolean
> >
> > instead?
> >
> > David.
> >
> >
>

--e89a8ff255c65ed40004b6ade274--