On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 2:42 PM, Jim Correia <email@hidden> wrote:
> 1) Chicken and egg problem where building automator actions for Product X
> requires Product X in order to compile the scripts
We were hoping to solve this for the time being by checking in the
sdef into source control. If future versions of our products use a
static sdef, this wouldn't be an issue if we could just hand this sdef
off to osacompile. Then the app wouldn't need to exist before
building the Automator actions.
> To solve problem #2, I just write the portion of the scripts which address
> applications not part of a stock Mac OS X install using raw chevron syntax.
> It isn’t necessarily pretty, and requires understanding how how AppleScript
> generates object specifiers (because sometimes you need to throw in an ‘of
> it’ where you wouldn’t need to when using english syntax), but it gets the
> job done.
Many of our users like to have the sample scripts written in plain
AppleScript; using the chevrons would deny them the ability to learn
from our Automator actions. It might be worth considering, though,
because we offer copious example scripts otherwise.
FWIW, these two solutions are the only ones that came up in my search
of the archives; it's a bit upsetting that despite the significant
advancements in the underlying architecture we're still missing that
final piece. So I've filed rdar://problem/7373335 to complain about
it. :)
Thanks,
--Kyle Sluder
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Applescript-implementors mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/applescript-implementors/email@hidden
This email sent to email@hidden
