• 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: Variable Ponderance
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Variable Ponderance


  • Subject: Re: Variable Ponderance
  • From: has <email@hidden>
  • Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 23:36:19 +0100

Michael Sullivan wrote:

>Like I said in my original post, I'm not talking about
human-language dialects but programmer-oriented ones such as the
C-like dialect that was originally planned. A nice, simple, regular,
unambiguous syntax

C syntax? Regular? Simple? Unambiguous?

Yes. No. Yes. WRT #1 and #3: which would be easier to write a parser for: C or AppleScript? WRT #2: Lisp has the simplest syntax of any language but you won't see many folk singing its praises. A certain level of complexity in syntax may be acceptable or even desireable.


One other thing: please read the above more carefully: I never used those terms to describe C syntax specifically. (If you're going to criticise me over misconceptions, please make sure they're my misconceptions, not yours.;p) I don't like C syntax either, consider anyone that does _severely_ taste-deficient (the art school snob in me), and think the best thing one could do with C is rip off everything this side of the AST and replace with S-expressions, making it easier to hook up the C compiler (the useful bit) with various front-ends (e.g. it's not uncommon to have higher-level languages, e.g. OCaml, and language extension mechanisms, e.g. Python's Pyrex, compile down to C as an intermediate language rather than go straight to machine code).

FWIW, a closer example to what I'd consider a 'good' syntax is Python's, which has plenty of faults of its own but is better than most.

Anyway, point was that preserving AppleScript dialects in a limited capacity might not have been an entirely bad thing, and an exceedingly cheap way (since the work was already done) to implement a show-me-what's-going-on-behind-the-smoke-and-mirrors magic button in script editors that could help AppleScript users to understand what's really going on beneath all that copious sugar. [1]

Cheers,

has

[1] Old programmer saying: "Too much sugar leads to cancer of the semi-colon." :)
--
http://freespace.virgin.net/hamish.sanderson/
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Applescript-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:

This email sent to email@hidden
  • Prev by Date: Re: Variable Ponderance
  • Next by Date: Re: No way to tell if an application is running without
  • Previous by thread: Re: Variable Ponderance
  • Next by thread: Re: Variable Ponderance
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread