Re: Libraries and effiency
Re: Libraries and effiency
- Subject: Re: Libraries and effiency
- From: Tommy Bollman <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2010 16:34:51 +0200
Hello Philip
> I think I can only agree with your school-marm-like finger wagging in the case of applications so yes, I should have been more specific.
> Otherwise, my suggestions hold. For example can easily realize the lure of using the obvious "import" and "load library" in an OSAX only to discover that developer B has used the same terms in his.
You know there is different aspects of this, between developers of stuff you can easily use such loader systems. (I think that system were invented with C, -but the resulting code where linked and shipped as an executable to end users.
There is end users I have in mind here, end users who doesn't know what the applications support folder are, or barely know how to enable the script menu.
I as a user has on *several* occasions got some Python and Perl installation, *totally broken*, and rendered useless, when I have naively upgraded the "frameworks", where I had to spend several hours trying to figure out what had happened. There is situations like this, where hardcoding solves such problems, (until something is replaced with a newer copy without version number stapled in.
If you have shipped something to a user, and you have to figure out what has happened, you might spend some hours.
As long as there is no namespaces system (though we could easily generate our own, using the java style naming convention for libraries plus version number), this is also something I feel points towards hardcoding when it comes to *shipment*/deployment of code at end users.
On 9 Aug 2010, at 13:19, Philip Aker wrote:
> On 2010-08-07, at 08:22:35, email@hidden wrote:
>
>>> As a user, what I'd appreciate is that loader developers consider AppleScript's lack of namespaces and devise their own for handler names. For example, instead of 'import' it would be something like: "AM import …", "KT load library …", or "TB set recursive search for library "…" to …".
>
>
>> To offer another opinion, as a user, when I see terms like that in a dictionary I quit the application and uninstall.
>
>> Terms in appleScript should be written to be consistent with the English-like syntax. Developers should be wary of terminology conflicts, but polluting the namespace is not the solution.
>
> I think I can only agree with your school-marm-like finger wagging in the case of applications so yes, I should have been more specific.
>
> Otherwise, my suggestions hold. For example can easily realize the lure of using the obvious "import" and "load library" in an OSAX only to discover that developer B has used the same terms in his.
>
> To this effect, I have filed a bug for osaxen to at least have the ability to be addressed something like:
>
> tell osax id "ca.aker.osax.WCHandy"
> …
> end
>
> so as to eliminate the possibility of terminology conflicts.
>
> Much appreciated if you want to file an enhancement request for namespaces. You can cite: <radr://8265885/> for referencing purposes.
>
>
> Philip Aker
> echo email@hidden@nl | tr a-z@. p-za-o.@
>
> Democracy: Two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
Best regards
Tommy Bollman
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mollison's Bureaucracy Hypothesis:
If an idea can survive a bureaucratic review
and be implemented it wasn't worth doing.
_______________________________________________
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