Re: upgrade issues: 8.1 --> X
Re: upgrade issues: 8.1 --> X
- Subject: Re: upgrade issues: 8.1 --> X
- From: Chris Nebel <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 18:20:16 -0800
- Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.
Jolly Roger wrote:
>
Why are we even talking about scripting additions past Classic Mac OS 9?
>
Scriptable applications have so many benefits over scripting additions, it's
>
not funny; yet I rarely see them mentioned. Instead, I see Apple trying to
>
offer support for this old mechanism in ways that make things more
>
complicated for end users.
>
>
IMHO, rather than trying to support the old scripting addition mechanism in
>
the Mac OS X non-classic environment, Apple should seize this perfect
>
opportunity to get developers to repackage scripting additions as scriptable
>
FBAs, and to push users to move to using scriptable FBAs.
Several points in no particular order:
1. We've been telling developers for at least a couple of years that scriptable
applications (possibly faceless) are preferable to scripting additions for end
users for a variety of reasons. We perhaps do not say this as loudly as we could.
2. Some things actually make more sense as scripting additions -- math commands
(e.g. sine, round) are the canonical example -- because they behave more like
extensions to the language than a scriptable object.
3. For backward compatibility reasons, we're more or less obliged to supply
Standard Additions on Mac OS X. Do you *really* want to rewrite every script you
have that uses "display dialog"?
4. The mechanism we came up with is as simple as we could technically make it.
Because of architectural decisions about how Carbon works on Mac OS 9 and the
architecture of Mac OS X itself, it's fundamentally impossible to have a single
binary that works on both 9 and X. The business of multiple folders is
superficially more complicated, but makes life a lot nicer on a multi-user system.
5. Let's be honest here: scripting additions are incredibly well entrenched. Most
scripters use them, and a lot use them heavily. As it is, people will have to
deal with their favorite addition not being immediately available natively on Mac
OS X. Personally, I'd rather not compound the pain by declaring that they're not
even allowed to have their favorite scripting addition natively on Mac OS X.
I don't disagree with your basic point that scripting additions have archtectural
problems, but as a practical matter, we have to support them. We've been looking
at ways to improve matters, but in the meantime, we have to ship something.
--Chris Nebel
AppleScript Engineering