• 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: Filemaker 8.5 stored applescript problem
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Filemaker 8.5 stored applescript problem


  • Subject: Re: Filemaker 8.5 stored applescript problem
  • From: Malcolm Fitzgerald <email@hidden>
  • Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 12:23:58 +1000


On 17/05/2007, at 3:56 AM, Stockly, Ed wrote:


M> It can be a nuisance, but comments don't get compiled, so you have them
there for re-use if/when you can't get them out of the way.

I'm a little lost here, are you saying copy and paste your comment into your
script every time you save?

No, each time you run the script in Smile or SE.

I'm suggesting that you keep a copy of the raw code protected by -- commenting .

If you have to test the code repeatedly in Script Editor or Smile the interpreter will "pretty print" the raw code. That's not what we want. However, comments aren't interpreted, so the comments will have the raw code.


By "getting them out of the way" I mean having the read or write
functionality stored in a handler or script library.

If you're saying putting the read write command in a handler to avoid the
terminology conflict, that would not work in this case, because handlers in
scripts launched from within filemaker are also executed as commands to
filemaker, and I believe the same is true for libraries used from those
scripts (but I'm not sure about that part).

You are right about the context but the point is that handlers or libraries are not being recompiled on every run so it is not necessary to replace the raw code each time you run through the script.



Clearly the simplest, easiest, appleScriptiest solution is to enclose the
commands in a Finder or System Events tell.

There's less typing in the raw codes method ;-)

In this case I would argue that
it's not noticeably less "efficient" or slower than the alternatives, unless
you're executing hundreds or thousands of OSAX calls.

It is always slower even on a single run. The question is, "Does it matter?"


I use FMP/Applescript combinations so frequently that I choose to the raw code method even when timing isn't an issue because its rock solid. One issue is that the tell method creates an unnecessary dependency. The osax doesn't need another app to do it's work, the tell method does. It is quite likely that the Finder is already busy (System Events is probably twiddling it's fingers) so you immediately begin time sharing. Apart from that, I like to think that code aggregates. If I build a handler that uses the most efficient methods I'm confident that it will work well.

malcolm


_______________________________________________ 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
References: 
 >Re: Filemaker 8.5 stored applescript problem (From: "Stockly, Ed" <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Appending text?
  • Next by Date: Re: Filemaker 8.5 stored applescript problem
  • Previous by thread: Re: Filemaker 8.5 stored applescript problem
  • Next by thread: Re: Filemaker 8.5 stored applescript problem
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread