Re: Scripting Additions: Embracing the Horror of Unix
Re: Scripting Additions: Embracing the Horror of Unix
- Subject: Re: Scripting Additions: Embracing the Horror of Unix
- From: Paul Berkowitz <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 11:25:09 -0800
On 1/30/02 10:55 AM, "Stockly, Ed" <email@hidden> wrote:
>
Yes, I've avoided it for a time by not Scripting OSX at all. The point here
>
is that as commands available from Scripting Additions become available in OS
>
X, they should maintain a 'pure' AppleScript syntax and not inherit the syntax
>
of shell scripting, C, Perl or whatever.
Agreed.
>
>
Right now they can call shell scripts and no one is saying that should be
>
taken away. What I am saying is that functionality should be created in pure
>
AppleScript otherwise I believe Apple will lose an important segment of their
>
market.
Agreed. No one is taking away 'do shell script' and people who know unix
will always have all that extra functionality at their finger tips.
>
>
>
>
Every command should be made available in pure AppleScript syntax. What has
>
me particularly concerned right now is some of the very basic functionality
>
that we had in OS 7-9 is gone and the discussion for reintroducing it is
>
leading to the quick and easy implementation that won't work for a lot of
>
AppleScripters.
Most, or all, of the basic functionality provided by Apple itself, and then
some, is provided in OS 10.1 and later. The problem really is that Apple
left a lot of quite basic functionality (as we seem to be agreed again)
unimplemented in OS 7/8/9, which was filled by osax writers. Since there has
already been quite lag in converting these to OS X, there's an opportunity
for things to be done better in OS X than in 7/8/9. I think we all dearly
wish that Apple itself would take the opportunity to provide many of these
functions themselves now. If they would publish a list, saying "we're going
to do the following 10, or 20, or 40, new scripting additions. We can't say
quite how soon they'll be ready, but please hold off for a bit longer", that
would be the best solution of all. Otherwise I, for one, will be grateful
for whatever is provided by 3rd-parties but strongly would hope that
bona-fide AS-syntax solutions will be provided. (I guess I'd settle for
unix-y ones until somebody came up with a proper AS-type osax later on, but
that way lies messiness.) I really wish Apple would provide a lead here,
laying down a few laws and terms and, hopefully, a few great osaxen - or
even better, native AS language commands - as well...
--
Paul Berkowitz