Re: Finder in processes false ?
Re: Finder in processes false ?
- Subject: Re: Finder in processes false ?
- From: Martin Orpen <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 15:01:03 +0100
- Thread-topic: Finder in processes false ?
on 12/10/05 00:22, has at email@hidden wrote:
> path of fonts folder of user domain
>
> to:
>
> path to fonts folder from user domain
>
> Two expressions that have very similar syntax but very different semantics. A
> language with conventional Algol-ish syntax would use something like:
>
> user_domain.fonts_folder.path
>
> and
>
> path_to(#fonts_folder, from=#user_domain)
>
> Not as pretty, and hard to make any kind of sense of if you don't already
> understand what all those additional cryptic-looking symbols mean. However, it
> does have the big advantage that the semantics of each expression are
> completely explicit: it's immediately obvious from the source code alone
> what's a command, what's an argument name, what's a property, what's an
> enumeration; no expert knowledge of hundreds of
> language/osax/application-installed keywords required to reach the same
> conclusion.
Isn't this missing the point of AppleScript?
If we wanted to create applications from scratch we'd learn the
*cryptic-looking symbols* - but most AS users are looking to automate a
repetitive process in a single application or grabbing chunks of data from
one application and feeding them into another.
Being totally reliant on developers and their implementation of certain
features means that we are all aware of the problems with the language.
The English-likeness is useful because it is the only thing that is really
shared between developers who can create apps in whatever language they
favour. AS is a lingua franca - a mixture of terms that cannot be truly
relied upon but works quite successfully all the same.
Expecting people to conform to a strict set of guidelines is as stifling as
using something like Automator. With AS you have the possibility of numerous
ways of achieving your goal. With Automator you have a limited number of
strictly prescribed methods.
Sure that's rational - and so explicit that you can drag and drop commands
on top of each other. But it's really dull too, because you only get to do
what the developer had the foresight to plan or allow for.
System Events and Standard Additions have different aims, goals and
histories. The fact that they use *similarish* terminology in different ways
should be celebrated as a good thing - because you can write it, test it,
adapt it and make it work.
Scripting an app *now* requires a little ingenuity and some occasional help
from people on this list who specialise in that specific app - a couple of
minutes head scratching and question asking and you've got it sorted.
And, from the developers POV, adding enough AppleScript features to allow a
scripter to grab data from your app requires little more input than clicking
a checkbox in Xcode!
Waiting for the publication of Automator Action or an exposed API means that
you could be waiting *forever*. Personally, I'd rather script *now* than
wait for some approved method. But that is probably because IANAPĀ
--
Martin Orpen
_______________________________________________
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