Re: Nice Automator article on O'Reilly
Re: Nice Automator article on O'Reilly
- Subject: Re: Nice Automator article on O'Reilly
- From: "Gary (Lists)" <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 06 May 2005 12:47:16 -0400
"Elliotte Harold" wrote:
> John C. Welch wrote:
>
>> AppleScript's syntax, while more clumsy and less efficient from a pure
>> programming point of view is also much FRIENDLIER. That comes with, like
>> every other syntax, advantages and disadvantages. I've seen secretaries jump
>> on to AppleScript.
>
> I couldn't disagree more. AppleScript is by far the least friendly
> language it's ever been my displeasure to use; and I've used Perl, VBA,
> and C++.
[clip]
> Almost 15 years after I
> started using AppleScript I still can't tell if a line of code is likely
> to compile or not.
And yet...here you are. ;)
> I still can't figure out which operations are likely
> to be allowed on which variables. Half the time I still can't tell why a
> line of code that looks correct isn't.
John, I gather that you must mean this in relation to _an application's
implementation_ of AppleScript. And then I think the problem is not "the
language" but the willy-nilly way that various applications are "allowed" to
implement their own dictionaries.
The biggest problem I think is from a "hands-off" approach at Apple with
respect to "approving" or "endorsing" an application as "scriptable". It's
willy-nilly and a dilution of the service and trademark "AppleScript". [1]
Some applications are "scriptable" to whomever wrote the AETE and no one
else. Heck, many applications publish dictionaries that are flat out wrong.
That ain't AppleScript ... that's Apple, IMO. (And the developer, of course,
but Apple has the power to approve or deny any markings, or develop a
program of certification.)
If it were my ship, any developer who claimed any "AppleScript"
functionality would be forced to demonstrate a proper use of terminology
(select should mean select, and so on) and a well-formed dictionary (okay,
some of Apple's are not good examples.) Otherwise, I'd sue them to have
that term removed from any marketing.
Who would ever consider (again) writing a language (not AE) and letting
anyone who wants just go and change it. Adding is one thing, redefining is
another. Again, what does 'select' mean "in AppleScript"? Argh.
And, we all bear some of the burden, too. We continue to line the pockets
of folks who make crappy dictionaries and not insist, through non-purchase,
that they get with the program. If I were the maker of a massively selling
application that could do some AS, and my AS implementation was poor, hidden
or quirky and folks still bought it anyway, and then complained that it was
"AppleScript" that was crappy, I'd sit back and sell that sucker and laugh
all the way to the bank. (Oh, yeah, I'd also have to be an evil villain.)
There is something more than world domination and brainwashing at work with
"Windows logo certification". If I see the AppleScript icon, I should
better believe there is AppleScript -- and not just someone's version of it.
--
Gary
[1] I have a business stake in Apple, and I do care about this. I am one
of those "I love Apple" people. Real family arguments and lost friends are
one of the results (and I still love to show off my framed first share from
long ago and make people squirm while I go on about the cultural and
technological advantages...and the recent Golden Child status on Wall
Street).
But, don't you think it might have gone like this:
"Look, we can brow-beat developers to use a standard and have fewer
developers for our shrinking user base or we can let them do what they want
and worry about the debris if we have to."
And now, we have to.
_______________________________________________
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