Re: Thanks and another question
Re: Thanks and another question
- Subject: Re: Thanks and another question
- From: John W Baxter <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 08:13:38 -0700
>
would this be a place for for "considering application
>
>response"?
considering application responses
is the normal default state. Its negation is
ignoring application responses
whose primary reason to exist was an early design which allowed for
applications not to respond at all to Apple events. The major application
which acted that way was the System 7.0 Finder (and a few later editions,
until "Scriptable Finder"). Finder's behavior caused UserLand to create
the FinderEvent verb, which expected no response...mostly for use with the
few events which the 7.0 Finder did accept.
There may perhaps be some modern reason to use
ignoring application responses
(when you want the script to blunder ahead without caring what the
application says about what you told it to do). In that case, considering
application responses restores normal behavior in a nested block:
ignoring application responses
some command to an app -- don't want to wait for result
considering application responses
--normal behavior of commands here
end considering
-- don't wait for applications to respond to commands here
end ignoring
Also, "application responses" means just that:
ignoring application responses
set a to current date
end ignoring
does indeed set a to the result of running the current date Addition (which
is not an application, and whose response is therefore not ignored).
--John
--
John Baxter email@hidden Port Ludlow, WA, USA