Re: Metamorphosax! (1.0a1 lives!)
Re: Metamorphosax! (1.0a1 lives!)
- Subject: Re: Metamorphosax! (1.0a1 lives!)
- From: Richard 23 <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:57:55 -0800
>
A number of people have posted about turning scripting additions into
>
applications. While having a separate application results in fewer
>
terminology conflicts, a downside is that there's more applications
>
that doesn't support the object model. No object model means verb +
>
noun phrases that pretend to be verb + object-references.
>
>
My suggestion a while ago, was not to turn the osaxen into
>
applications, but to write them as applications. That way they could
>
be designed for object model support.
Gadzooks Cal, which one is worse? I can't solve the poor choice of
the term "property name" in Eighty Lister, as an example, but by
removing the bugger from the global namespace and isolating (exiling)
in it to its own script applet it still is available, but on my terms!
(horrible pun).
To do so, all I need to do is drop it onto my Metamorphosax droplet and
it does all the resource copying, calls applet binder. To make sure it's
visible to script editor when I compile I can then make an alias to the
new applet in script editor's folder.
From that point on, I can use EightyLister using tell statements and it
doesn't refuse to compile my scripts which contain something like the
following:
property name: "Metamorphosax"
property version: "1.0a1"
property date: current date
....
all because it combines two AppleScript terms into one.
If I were to wait until each osax dictionary were thoughtfully revised
before using it as an application...well, I'd be in for a long wait!
>
A number of people have posted about turning scripting additions into
>
applications. While having a separate application results in fewer
>
terminology conflicts, a downside is that there's more applications
>
that doesn't support the object model. No object model means verb +
>
noun phrases that pretend to be verb + object-references.
Maybe you were being ironic on purpose...in which case...'touche!'
And I salute you for the subtle wit!
But they already don't support the object model and get to camp
on top of the global namespace at all times. When isolated in
an applet, the terms are only available for the short period of
time they're in use. Methinks this is an improvement no matter
how you look at it!
R23
>
(Boy, you folks are making me work!)
It's good for ya!
>
Cal