compileIt for Revolution?

[Mikey]

> Try not to get your knickers in a twist. In case you haven't noticed,
> hypertalk/transcript is clearly a Pascal derived language, they just got rid of
> begin/end, loosely typed it, and made the operator of affectation verbose.
<ROTFL/>  OMG that's funny.  Don't forget scoping, and the overarching
paradigm of cards, backgrounds, stacks scripts, properties, and
messages and an inheritence path, and the vocabulary, and the fact
that nobody could describe what it was, and the fact that it was
originally intended to be interpreted not compiled, and therefore DO,
and oh hell.  You weren't serious so I don't have to add anything
here.  I mean - really - I was pretty sure xTalk was inspired by
COBOL's verbose syntax and...and...<choking on my beverage/> .  Now
that I look at it, I'm having a hard time telling the difference
between BASIC and LISP and APL.  <ROTFL/>  Dude, you slay me.

Ok, now in case you were serious (and if you were I'm sorry for
laughing and making fun of your post) xTalk is now a legacy language
type with expectations and conventions and philosophy.  I'm reasonably
sure that := doesn't fit that philosophy, nor does a=b.  If you want
compact, you need to go somewhere else.  xTalk is intentionally
verbose.  Philosophically, I like it that way.  It means that it is
much easier for me to read someone else's code, especially since most
of you can't write an intelligent comment in your code to save your
lives.

I'm going to stop reading this thread now before I REALLY get flamed.
-- 
http://taoofrunrev.blogspot.com
http://taoof4d.blogspot.com
http://4dwishlist.blogspot.com
On the first day, God created the heavens and the Earth
On the second day, God created the oceans.
On the third day, God put the animals on hold for a few hours,
   and did a little diving.
And God said, "This is good."