Re: AS Library Question
Re: AS Library Question
- Subject: Re: AS Library Question
- From: Shane Stanley <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 08 Dec 2015 16:30:44 +1100
On 7 Dec 2015, at 4:12 AM, has <email@hidden> wrote:
>
> Basically, official libraries = more design flaws, more complexity, and more opportunities to blow up on you when you're not expecting it.
When you first gave us your views on script libraries, your objections largely boiled down to the per-instance nature of them, and your dislike of the (entirely optional) .sdef terminology scheme. Oh, and the potential conflict with JXA .scpt files. (You appended a few unrelated radar links for good measure, but it looks they were fixed in 10.11.)
And, you followed up a little later with a more optimistic take:
> Instead, think about how to get the most out of what we do have: a library loader which is not technically great but does have the big advantage of being included in AS as standard
Indeed, you went even further:
> Getting half-dozen nice standard AS libraries into 10.11 would provide significant benefit to all AS users at little cost to the AS team themselves.
So I'm wondering if your latest assessment is based on more recent experience or technical insight. Because some of us seem to be finding them pretty useful, dare I say even agreeable, if that's not too strong a word for anything AppleScript-related. From a user point of view they don't seem any more complex than any other AS library loading scheme -- au contraire -- and they don't seem to be blowing up unexpectedly. What are we missing that's peculiar to libraries? Or is chicken voodoo proving to be a reasonable call?
--
Shane Stanley <email@hidden>
<www.macosxautomation.com/applescript/apps/>
_______________________________________________
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