Re: Applet's last command doesn't take
Re: Applet's last command doesn't take
- Subject: Re: Applet's last command doesn't take
- From: Paul Berkowitz <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 19:04:21 -0800
On 2/26/01 4:28 PM, "John W Baxter" <email@hidden> wrote:
>
At 8:53 -0800 2/26/01, Paul Berkowitz wrote:
>
> We've been around this before, Richard. Since the 32K limit is not in
>
> AppleScript but in Script Editor, and you have said before that you have
>
> other script editors which don't have the 32K limit, could you please remind
>
> us why you don't use them?
>
>
For scripts distributed to others (except as run-only, or at least script
>
application form),
...or Compiled Script form for one of the many applications that have script
menus. I have posted a few monster scripts in this mode on the web and never
had a complaint. Most users just want to run the script. Probably the few
that want to open it up and read it have Smile.
>
one probably *should* sanity check the script for
>
fitting within Script Editor's limits, before sending it out. Regardless
>
of how one prepares it.
There was no way that these 3 scripts could ever have been squashed down to
that size. They all involved having the user select one of many, many
mutually exclusive options at any one time. so the scripts are easy and fast
to run, but huge, due to all the possible options that might be taken, but
aren't. Lots of handlers. There's absolutely no way, and no reason, for them
to have been much shorter, and they work perfectly fine. I don't take all
that kindly to someone else saying "They should have been shorter." What do
you know about them without looking at them?
>
>
A larger script in text form would not be available to the largish portion
>
of the audience who can't--with what is on their machines--exceed 32K.
There's no law that says they have to read them or compile them. I would
never send them in text form when they're that size, of course, which I
guess is your concern.
--
Paul Berkowitz