Re: dev tools [was: Re: What makes AppleScript COOL!]
Re: dev tools [was: Re: What makes AppleScript COOL!]
- Subject: Re: dev tools [was: Re: What makes AppleScript COOL!]
- From: "John C. Welch" <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2007 16:27:38 -0600
- Thread-topic: dev tools [was: Re: What makes AppleScript COOL!]
Title: Re: dev tools [was: Re: What makes AppleScript COOL!]
On 12/08/2007 13:12 PM, "Ed Stockly" <email@hidden> wrote:
>>> for LNS, AppleScript tools are its core business - and having one's paychecks being 100% directly dependent on delivering top-quality product can really help focus the mind.
That's right, and one reason why I don't think Apple should provide an enhanced debugger is it would drive LNS out of business and Mark makes a huge contribution to AppleScript.
I wouldn’t worry about it. Apple insists on wrapping their debugger around GDB, and the chances of that dealing well with AppleScript are only SLIGHTLY worse than the FCP/DVDSP team realizing that process automation and letting their users decide how to integrate FCP/DVDSP with other applications. In other words, don’t expect it to change anytime soon.
>>>Every application API is different. It's unrealistic to expect knowledge of one third-party API to be directly transferable to another third-party API.
I don't think that's the case at all with AppleScript. I think the more applications you script, the easier it is to master scripting new applications.
Gotta agree with Ed here. There are some differences between applications, but by and large, the more you script applications, the easier scripting other applications get, unless an application just does something really bizarre.
That's one of the beauties of appleScript. That's one of the reasons we have appleScript. One language, many apps. The knowledge I gained by scripting Quark directly transferred to scripting InDesign. Same with with countless other apps.
The only exeption I’ve found is Word, whose dictionary is based on the VBA model, and dear lord is that weird.
>>>The problem is getting up to speed on new APIs when they are almost invariably grossly under-documented.
Of course, that's exactly where Scripter's command builder helped so much.
As does Script Debugger's live object model. API documentation really helps, but it still falls short of being able to see, with real data, exactly what every property and element looks like in real-world use.
>>>Non-technical users are blessed with the unawareness that they are being sold short.
Is it possible to be any more condescending? Does that really help?
If it’s getting the job done for them, then they, by definition, are not being sold short.
--
Love is a merry elf dancing a happy jig, when suddenly, he turns on you with
a submachine gun.
Matt Groening
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
AppleScript-Users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
Archives: http://lists.apple.com/archives/applescript-users
This email sent to email@hidden