• 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: terminology conflicts, etc. [was: Re: A date IS a date]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: terminology conflicts, etc. [was: Re: A date IS a date]


  • Subject: Re: terminology conflicts, etc. [was: Re: A date IS a date]
  • From: has <email@hidden>
  • Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:59:09 +0000


On 13 Feb 2008, at 02:01, Jason Bruce wrote:

I don't quite agree with your comments, here.  Ed is
saying that it is a feature of the language (not a
design flaw) that the same word can compile to
different things depending on the context, because it
makes the language smaller,

Ed's post is complete nonsense; a total non-sequitur; your typical Chewbacca Defense.


The problem being discussed is how and when AppleScript determines which words are variable names, which are symbol names and which are command names when given a sequence of words (source code) to compile and execute. The "verb-noun" separation that Ed describes has precisely *nothing* to do with this. Nothing. Nada. Zilch.

Heck, 'verb-noun' separation is not even a concept unique or original to AppleScript. Other languages manage to provide the same command- object distinction just fine - it's a basic tenet of object-oriented design (see "polymorphism"), after all, so any language that calls itself "object-oriented" has to support it as a matter of course. Behold; verb-noun separation in AppleScript:

	command object

followed by verb-noun separation in Ruby:

	object.command

BFD in other words. So even if it was somehow relevant to the problem, it still wouldn't carry an ounce of water in justifying the problems that AppleScript's "unique" approach to parsing and interpreting AppleScript code causes, because other languages provide the same service without any such problems just fine.


(note use of the
word "design flaw" in both Mark's post and Ed's),
which makes Ed's post on topic.


Good grief. Please tell me you're pulling my leg.

has
--
http://appscript.sourceforge.net
http://rb-appscript.rubyforge.org

_______________________________________________
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: terminology conflicts, etc. [was: Re: A date IS a date] (From: Jason Bruce <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Help with understanding matrices
  • Next by Date: Re: Run AppleScript in the background (hide window)
  • Previous by thread: Re: terminology conflicts, etc. [was: Re: A date IS a date]
  • Next by thread: Run AppleScript in the background (hide window)
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread