Search Unity

  1. Megacity Metro Demo now available. Download now.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Unity support for visionOS is now available. Learn more in our blog post.
    Dismiss Notice

Make JS and Boo deprecated in Unity 4. And non-functional in Unity 5

Discussion in 'Wish List' started by Meltdown, Apr 12, 2012.

  1. retypeNick

    retypeNick

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2012
    Posts:
    12
    WOW.

    Just read the whole thread. And oh boy :D In turn I was laughing, and in turn was fuming how... some people in this thread are.

    Anyways, interesting to see how very few people actually talk about factual arguments regarding language plus or minuses for productive workflow. guavaman actually put it best regarding JS/US vs C# for newbies. That is how I've seen it, experienced it and reasoned it.

    What comes to supporting multiple languages = slower progression of platform. Unless company has unlimited resources it will slow things down. Less is more, here too. It would be nice to be able to write with no matter what language, but it is way more important to have all the community content with same language, isn't it?

    The API is not in the possible best shape, and same goes for documentation. If there would be only 1 language, IMHO they had more time to fix these, with more ease, as only 1 language needs to support API.

    What comes to adapting C# for developers who have JS background, it seriously takes only a day. I know, I come from AS1,2,3 / Java background. Syntax is nearly identical, only couple more things to write, which is NOT the problem JS developers have, it's the fear of leaving comfort zone, which would only happen for a day.

    What we need is better API / framework for C#, better documentation for C# and if it's impossible to drop US then implement new API and documentation for it too.

    If I could only choose one path in future, its the same that Adobe did with AS3(dropping AS1, AS2). Just make us bite the bullet, and go with C#, and use it's mature feature to the fullest with framework / API supporting it all the way. And make the documentation top notch.
     
  2. alvivar

    alvivar

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2012
    Posts:
    16
    I still can't see the problem. People get confused so let's wipe out two supported languages :S </irony>

    This is a problem that can be solved with better documentation and examples.
     
  3. jc_lvngstn

    jc_lvngstn

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Posts:
    1,508
    People need to step back and think about what might happen here.
    5 years down the road, Microsoft comes out with their next awesome programming language...Awesome#. Or someone else comes out with something even slicker.
    C# starts to fade.
    People start complaining about UT having to support C# AND Awesome#. So is UT supposed to retool every X years, to support better languages?

    UT knows the breaking point, where supporting feature X, operating system X, or language X isn't worth it anymore. Until then, more choice is great. Am I happy that the documentation has some nasty holes in it? No, but only UT can answer if it's because they have to provide examples for three different languages, or they don't enough manpower...etc etc etc.

    I mean...look at the number of windows machines out there, vs Macs. You could argue UT should waste VERY little effort in support of OS X. The same goes for Boo support vs C# or UnityScript support.

    But hopefully the reason comes down to just wanting to give people more choice, instead of a bunch of WE HATES MICROSOFT FOREVER mentality.