Re: functions as sort of first class objects
Re: functions as sort of first class objects
- Subject: Re: functions as sort of first class objects
- From: Axel Luttgens <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 28 May 2016 13:03:17 +0200
> Le 26 mai 2016 à 17:09, has <email@hidden> a écrit :
>
> Axel Luttgens <email@hidden> wrote:
>>> >
>>> Le 26 mai 2016 à 01:44, Mitchell L Model a écrit :
>>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> […]
>>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> I would love to hear an explanation of this, though I realize I am heading away from AppleScript life as we know it on this one.
>>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> […]
>>>
>> I guess all of this goes more about syntactic matters; my theory is as follows… ;-)
>>
>> Properties and handlers are top-level entities of a script (for such purposes, handlers may even be viewed as a special case of properties); the parser views a statement such as "g()" as a handler invocation when symbol "g" itself is recognized as a top-level entity.
>>
>
> Well, no: the compiler *always* recognizes `g()` as a command because syntactically that’s what it is.
Yet with seemingly differing outcomes:
- either I’m able to bind symbol g to something meaningful in the context of a handler invocation
- or I’ll throw some message g in the hope it will be understood somewhere in the path
Now, as you say, there’s nothing to endorse nor recommend here. Just attempts to theorize a black box’ behavior. ;-)
Axel
_______________________________________________
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