Suggestion for correcting the IDE's script editor AND Endless ranting and rude insults AND other points

[M Young]

Hello everyone,

I know that I have not yet offered much scripting help etc. to others 
on this list since I do not feel I know Revolution well enough yet to 
offer good suggestions, but I would like to comment on a few things 
that I have seen posted on this list recently in several threads. I 
have attempted to attribute list posted comments correctly and I 
apologize in advance if I have made any errors. I also apologize in 
advance if anyone believes their comments are being incorrectly taken 
out of context.


Thomas McGrath III Wed, 29 Jun 2005 00:26:14 -0400: I do mind about how 
Rev progresses and grows and I for one don't want it influenced by 
these other languages or programs at all.
Michael Young (MY): I thought cross pollination of programs, languages, 
etc. is intended to advance the computer/technology/etc. state of the 
art. Granted sometimes people try to combine technologies and ideas 
that do not "belong" together, but I do not see anything wrong with the 
effort.


Judy Perry Tue, 28 Jun 2005 22:25:48 -0700 (PDT): No DOT NOTATION!!!!!  
It SUX... It's hard.to.read.this:total.utter:crap!
MY: I personally find the dot notation easy to read and sometimes even 
find it easier to read than x-talk syntax that I am still learning. By 
your acting as self appointed defender of the x-talk/Revolution faith, 
I personally did not find your SHOUTING to be very 
professional/pleasant/etc.


Scott Kane Wed, 29 Jun 2005 14:47:55 +1000: I guarantee if people using 
Rev went to the Borland newsgroups and demanded x-code there's be a 
whole bunch of laughter - and so it should be with others coming to 
Rev.
MY: Very true. The current Revolution list does not seem to be a 
productive place to request language syntax, etc. changes. In the last 
few years I have followed this Revolution list such requests seem to be 
regularly put down by old x-talk hands. May be posters should be 
directed to a more appropriate list for such discussions, presuming one 
exists.


Richard Gaskin Tue, 28 Jun 2005 21:53:49 -0700: A lot of people from a 
wide range of programming backgrounds have learned Rev easily with the 
help of the folks here.
MY: Very true, however I find that the old x-talk hands on this list 
expect all new Rev users to be programming neophytes. "Dan [Shafer] 
coined the term "Inventive User" to describe people who use programs 
like Revolution to create solutions to their own problems without 
necessarily becoming professional programmers in the process." ( 
http://www.altuit.com/webs/altuit/RevConWest/Sponsors.htm ) The problem 
is some new Revolution users are professional programmers and just as I 
am sure that many list members would consider themselves professional 
programmers. It is not appropriate for old x-talk hands to expect 
professional programmers to forget all programming 
techniques/environments/languages/etc they have learned, just as it is 
not appropriate for professional programmers new to Revolution to 
expect language syntax changes to be the only thing that changes when 
they move to Revolution and they even want to use their old language 
syntax in Revolution.


Scott Kane Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:20:09 +1000: The Rev community (the 
developers using Rev) don't take them selves as seriously as other 
languages - by that I mean they aren't jumping on newbie's and telling 
them to RTFM. Common with Delphi, C++, Visual Basic etc.
MY: Very true. I have been following 
gettingstarted-request at lists.realsoftware.com in the last few weeks. 
That list is very rough and tumble compared with this Revolution list.


Bob Warren Wed, 29 Jun 2005 04:30:07 -0300: I like it [x-talk or Rev, I 
am not quite sure what "it" is] too. In fact, I think that Rev has so 
much in its favour - its philosophy, the Transcript language, even the 
IDE and (yes!) the script editor - that I feel outraged that anyone can 
treat it with so little respect that they continue to let it be riddled 
with bugs. I have been involved with computers since the  early 1960s, 
so perhaps I am a little out of fashion in my attitude towards bugs. In 
my time, they were things to be exterminated urgently. I never thought 
of keeping them as pets, adoring them or even selling them!
MY: Yes. Revolution bugs need to go away. Bugs cause unexpected 
behavior that will turn off potential new Revolution/Dreamcard 
customers. Besides I have paid a lot of money for a product that I 
expect to simply work.


Bob Warren Wed, 29 Jun 2005 05:13:10 -0300: I share your indignation at 
some of the scandalous generalizations that have been made on this 
List, and I think it is a pity. But the other side of the coin is that 
comparisons with other languages is, or should be, natural and normal, 
and I see no good reason for creating taboos in this respect. A worse 
situation would be if Revolution became a closed community, not 
admitting "foreign" influences, criticisms, comparisons or suggestions. 
We all know what madness this leads to.
MY: I agree completely.


Mark Smith Wed, 29 Jun 2005 00:22:37 +0100: I don't think anyone has 
really suggested that you shouldn't mind. But it's the nature of this 
list for people to offer workarounds and show examples of how they deal 
with things. For what it's worth, I agree that the script editor is 
buggy in it's formatting, but not so much that you can't work.
MY: It bothers when a tool that costs a lot of money is buggy. I want 
the toaster of software development -- just plug it in and it works. I 
see no reason for me to need workarounds.


Jon Wed, 29 Jun 2005 07:08:57 -0400: I'm slightly annoyed at the 
auto-format feature (<tab> key), because it does not support my 
particular and unconventional style, but I accept that. I'm much more 
frustrated with what I see as the buggy way the auto-indent feature 
works.  It gets in the way more often than it helps, and I've seen 
better UIs that do not get in the user's way. Perhaps we should 
distinguish between the two features.  I think that Bob and I are more 
concerned about the auto-indent feature
MY: Good points especially regarding the distinguishing point.


Richard Gaskin Wed, 29 Jun 2005 00:44:22 -0700: In its most basic form, 
a Rev script editor is just a field in a stack. The field is loaded 
with the script in response to the editScript message (trappable in a 
frontScript if you want to get the message before the Rev editor does), 
and the script is just a property saved to the object with the save 
command ("set the script of <obj> to <script>"). It's not all that hard 
to make a place to type if that's all you need. Or you can use 
Constellation. Or BBEdit. Or the MC IDE. Or.....
MY: Is the information on how to swap out editors, capture editScript 
message, and etc. obvious to someone new to programming or coming from 
another programming environment? I could not find how to swap out the 
editor in the Revolution application documentation by using "Search 
for:" in Topics, Dictionary or Objects.


Jon Wed, 29 Jun 2005 07:20:39 -0400: It sounds to me as if Tom, coming 
from HC and SC, found some things to be "natural", while I, coming from 
the UCSD Pascal P-System Advanced System Editor (pre-dates the IBM PC 
entirely), and then, with lots of grumbling, Delphi, find it 
not-so-natural. I've heard lots of defenders for the current editor, 
and lots of people saying "don't change it", but I've not heard many 
people with actual experience with both the VB and Delphi editors AND 
Rev who come down on the side of the Rev editor.  Maybe it's been said 
and I've not noticed.
MY: I agree that old x-talk hands defend their editor but it is not 
clear that they have ever used anything else, at least in a very long 
time. The problem is, as I mentioned above, programmers new to 
Revolution are expected to forget all programming 
techniques/environments/languages/etc. they have learned and just 
accept the Revolution way of doing things.


Mark Waddingham Wed, 29 Jun 2005 17:01:51 +0100: I've been reading this 
thread [Re: Suggestion for correcting the IDE's script editor] this 
morning and it does seem to have become somewhat of a 'holy war'  which 
I'm sure is not what anybody intended. <Clipped long helpful and mostly 
well reasoned post.>
MY: I largely agree with this post to the extent that I considered not 
posting this list submission that I had been working on.


Other points:
1. All Runtime Revolution owners, investors, contractors, 
subcontractors, etc., i.e. anyone who financially benefits from the 
sale of Runtime Revolution products, should somehow acknowledge it in 
their list signature line, since not all new users to the list know who 
is making money on the deal. For example, one unnamed poster does not 
acknowledge in their signature line a Runtime Revolution affiliation 
that is really quite important for others to know.
2. In reviewing this e-mail and the list postings that prompted me to 
write it, I have become puzzled about who Runtime Revolution's target 
audience is: "Inventive User" or professional programmer. I found it 
interesting that it appears to be the professional programmers who have 
been the most vocal about things they would like changed in Revolution, 
which things by and large do make sense to me.

Sincerely,

Michael Young
Currently Inventive User of Runtime Revolution