has, thanks for self-identifying yourself as, not just an expert, but "THE world expert".
I have no doubt that you, and most others on this list, have expertise in AppleScript and Mac automation far above my minimal skills.
While I used to be a professional software developer, I have never used AppleScript nor JXA for professional, or even large system, purposes. Before that, I was a systems engineer who worked with a number of true world-class experts in science and technologies
far beyond AppleScript (or any Mac automation).
There's an old joke, which you may or may not appreciate: 😉
What's the definition of an expert?
Answer: A person with a closed mind.
I learned long ago how to take maximum advantage of expert advice in the development of practical solutions.
So I really appreciate the counsel you offer, but more so for the specific code examples and AppleScript libraries you have published. As I mentioned in another post, your Date.scptd AppleScript library looks very interesting and useful, although I have
not tested it yet.
My interest, and use cases, in Mac automation (AppleScript, JXA, etc) is in developing relatively simple, short solutions for automating my daily tasks using the Mac, and for sharing these with others who have similar needs.
As such, my solutions are NOT intended to be totally comprehensive, nor 100% bullet proof. I do generally try to trap for the most common errors, but I'm sure there are some cases that will slip through. Since virtually none of my solutions involve
data destruction, this seems a reasonable compromise between having extensive validation/error checking and development time. I don't try to write the most compact, nor the most sophisticated code — just good enough code to get the job done in a reasonable
manner. I'm sure this is way below your standards.
One thing that did surprise me is the severe, personal criticism you made of my code without having even reviewed a significant amount of my work:
Congratulations, you write noddy code.
This does tend to lend itself to the response of a closed mind.
I've had my code, and that of others, described in many ways, but never "noddy".
BTW,
"noddy" is a noun, so maybe you will want to find an adjective that is more appropriate.
IAC, I have found that when "experts" resort to using personal derogatory terms with those they disagree with, they do so when their technical arguments are not holding up.
You can discount it all you want (all without any actual review of the code), but I and others have found JXA to be very usable in the context I described above. I know of, and have seen, the JXA code of several others who I would say have considerable
expertise, and are developing some sophisticated solutions.
BTW, you should know that when you enter rant mode, I stop reading/listening to you.
You can convince me with logical technical arguments, but not with a bunch of subjective terms.
I was not asking for you to do any work for me when I asked for your list of JXA issues.
Perhaps I made a bad assumption that you had such a list, ready to throw out to those who dared to use JXA.
If you don't have, or don't want to share, such a list, that's fine.
Best Regards,
Jim Underwood
aka
JMichaelTX
From: has <
email@hidden>
Date: Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 11:31 AM
To: "ASUL (AppleScript)" <
email@hidden>
Subject: Re: Scripting Better Applescript support requests !
Jim Underwood wrote:
With all due respect [...] I and others, continue to use and develop JXA scripts on a daily basis
that work very well.
Just so we're clear: you do realize I am THE world expert in this
technology? "Respect" would be NOT insulting my intelligence with that
"it works for me" garbage (the SOP reply of every Real Programmer when
politely informed their product works wrong).
. . .
. . .
. . .
If you have a detailed list of JXA issues that you believe are flaws or
bugs, along with example code, please post the reference. It is always
helpful to know what won't work about any piece of software (and ALL
software have their issues/quirks/bugs).
I don't "believe"—I know. I'm world expert, you're not. And sorry, no,
I'm not doing your homework for you.
. . .