[mtasc] mtasc 1.08 version problem

[AJ]

Hi All.

Thank you for answer.
You are the man, so I won't argue with you about AS2 type system 
possibilities. Let it be.
But won't it be usefull if MTASC get's this ability? Otherwise there is 
no difference if you point "classB implements interfaceC" or not.
My way of solving this "problem" might be wrong, but It's just a proposal.
I would be happy if MTASC shows a warning at least when situation I was 
talking about happends.
What do you think about it?

I do not argue with Scott too, I feel your logic and I thought the same. 
I only have odd feeling about useless writting "classB implements 
interfaceC" :)

AJ

Nicolas Cannasse wrote:

>>Here is my question...
>>[1]-----------------------------
>>interfaceC has field "fieldA"
>>    ...
>>
>>[2]-----------------------------
>>classA implements interfaceC //must have fieldA and has it
>>    var fieldA;
>>    ...
>>
>>[3]-----------------------------
>>classB extends classA implements interfaceC //must have fieldA
>>    ...
>>
>>Now: It does not matter if classB has fieldA defined or has not -
>>compilator do not warn/error me while compiling.
>>    
>>
>
>Yes the compiler is correct, what you want is not possible to encode with
>AS2 type system.
>
>Nicolas
>
>--
>MTASC : no more coffee break while compiling
>
>  
>