• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: (2 of 2) Application Scripting Question - Theoretical? (was Re: Technote 2106 is da Bomb)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: (2 of 2) Application Scripting Question - Theoretical? (was Re: Technote 2106 is da Bomb)


  • Subject: Re: (2 of 2) Application Scripting Question - Theoretical? (was Re: Technote 2106 is da Bomb)
  • From: Michael Terry <email@hidden>
  • Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 11:04:24 -0700

On Apr 14, 2004, at 6:46 AM, Nigel Garvey wrote:

When compiling the line:

set L's contents to {3, 4}

... the compiler has no idea what L will be or what its contents will be.
The most reasonable assumption, given the language specification, is that
L will be a reference and that it's contents will be either another
variable or a property. The sensible and reasonable course in this case
is to generate code that will assign the single list value {3, 4} to
whatever variable or property 'L's contents' refers to when the code's
run.

OK, you make a good point. But you have to understand that I consider that an implementation detail which doesn't take priority over language usefulness. Conceptually, you can set a variable, use the 'contents' operator to set what's inside a variable, set a list of variables, and--since the contents operator works on lists, too, in a usefully analogous way--you should be able to use it to set the contents of variables in a list. How the compiler and interpreter work aren't part of the specification, and besides, where the specification let's me down, it needs to be amended. Presumably, the interpreter could check to see if the contents were a list or a variable, and act accordingly. This might slow down interpretation for the common case, but I'm not a compiler and interpreter writer, so there may be optimizations available. At any rate, I think other languages handle similar cases the way I think it should work, so I've a hard time believing that it's not technically feasible.

Mike
_______________________________________________
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.


  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: (2 of 2) Application Scripting Question - Theoretical? (was Re: Technote 2106 is da Bomb)
      • From: "John W. Baxter" <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Re: (2 of 2) Application Scripting Question - Theoretical? (was Re: Technote 2106 is da Bomb) (From: Nigel Garvey <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: (no subject)
  • Next by Date: Re: (2 of 2) Application Scripting Question - Theoretical? (was Re: Technote 2106 is da Bomb)
  • Previous by thread: Re: (2 of 2) Application Scripting Question - Theoretical? (was Re: Technote 2106 is da Bomb)
  • Next by thread: Re: (2 of 2) Application Scripting Question - Theoretical? (was Re: Technote 2106 is da Bomb)
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread