set rect of fld f1 of cd c1 of wd w1 to rect of fld f2 of cd c2 of wd w2
dburgun at dsl.pipex.com
Tue Aug 30 06:00:19 CDT 2005
>David Burgun wrote:
>>>How about if we eliminate both and enforce just a single-character
>>>typing convention for objects and numeric values only for object
>>>identification? That way "field 3 of card 7" would come out to "f3c7"
>>>for a minimum of typing. The engine's parser would, of course,
>>>separate these into separate tokens "f 3 c 7" and be quite happy.
>>>Developers would have to type just four characters and the code would
>>>be much more readable because there's just one way to describe an
>>>object instead of two. The engine's parser would also run faster
>>>because it wouldn't have to discriminate between two different forms
>>>of object description.
>>This sounds and looks just horrible!
>WTM? !comf w/abbr?
>(Translation: What's the matter? Not comfortable with abbreviations?")
>I'm with you: Transcript's existing abbreviations are about as
>sparse as I'd like to go.
Yes, I don't really care how they are stored in the script as long as
the editor could expand them to the way the user wants to see them. I
the "C/C++" language there are formatters that allow you to see the
source code formatted to a particular style, something similar would
be good in RunRev.
But even if you had to type in the long form each time, the amount of
time taken to type card or field instead of cd or fld is minimal, in
fact, I reckon most people that are used to a keyboard would type the
long forms more quickly. Also once you have cut/copy+paste it all
becomes meaningless anyway. When I type a script, I'd say at least
70% of it is pasted and then edited from previous lines anyway.
Take Care and All the Best
More information about the use-livecode