Re: Do shell script and special characters
Re: Do shell script and special characters
- Subject: Re: Do shell script and special characters
- From: has <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 20:04:50 +0100
Arthur J. Knapp wrote:
>
> And I wish, for that among other reasons, that a binary block data
>
> type should finally be invented for AppleScript, which should allow
>
> for conversions from mere bytes into various other data formats (e.g.
>
> string encodings) and back. Then AppleScript could finally become a
>
> hub, where software of different cultural backgrounds neatly finds
>
> together.
>
>
Yes, yes, yes. This would be a wonderful addition to the language.
No, no, no. Call me old-fashioned, but I _like_ my high-level languages to
be HIGH-LEVEL and my low-level languages to be LOW-LEVEL. Sticking
low-level features into a high-level language feels like taking a perfectly
good hammer and sharpening the other end so you can also use it as a
screwdriver. All you end up with is a mutilated hammer and a lousy
screwdriver. Ugh.
What's important is making it REALLY EASY for lots of different
environments to _cooperate_ with one another. Rather than clutter up the
core AS language with low-level funk, make it REALLY EASY for anyone to
hook outside components into it, and REALLY EASY to pass data between those
components without having to pop the damn lid off it and beat around inside
with a spanner each time. If something needs done, get some _component_ to
do it for you.
Now this is hardly a new idea. AppleScript has long had scriptable apps and
osaxen - but I neither comes close to "really easy"; new and better
mechanisms are urgently needed. And Unix itself was built upon the Big Idea
of aggregating lots of small, single-purpose components that could be
strung together to perform complex tasks - but is far from the friendliest
environment to work in.
THIS is where AppleScript needs to focus; not on adding yet another load of
half-baked features and ideas, but taking the ones _it_already_has_ and
pushing them to the max. The ability to hook into the shell looks to have
considerable potential, but there's obviously a lot more work needed to
make it simple, seamless and foolproof. And here's hoping whatever
replacement is being cooked up for osaxen will finally fix all our current
extension woes. Beyond that... who knows? Sky is the limit.
So, let all those other components be good at what they each do: creating
C-strings, Pascal-strings, converting one to the other, and a myriad other
tasks. And let AS concentrate on doing what _it_ does best: getting
EVERYONE ELSE to do all the dirty work so it doesn't have to. After all,
why even try beating everyone else if you can RULE THEM ALL instead? It's
the One Ring principle; AppleScript's _own_ Big Idea brought
bang-up-to-date and polished to perfection.
/2c
has
--
http://www.barple.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk -- The Little Page of AppleScripts
_______________________________________________
applescript-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/applescript-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.