[Fr] [En] Re: French list

[MisterX]

coming soon in TAOO...
A multi-lingual script editor (with a line ruler even!)

The old metacard script editor i made long ago is still light years ahead of
RunRevs despite 2 years of dust. So im working on it on it again because i
need a scripting boost again (with extensible language extensions present in
taoo).

Features: dictionaries, fully normal and working customizeable
script-coloring, keyword or expression translations, auto-styling, java, c
php, basic, javascript, flash code translations (or just editing),
incredible variety of indexes for all script/code structures, flowcharts,
keywords, filters, searches, really-smart auto-completion, pretype in-field
(no extra commands), to name a few... 

Should be out in a month or two... The RevGM prevented any rev-release... 

Any ideas on self-testing scripts are welcome... I just thought of a
gui-quality-manager/testing agent... First item in the list was - find the
put statements or some common script errors... RevGM errors in stacks,
breakpoints, etc... Im sure many could be interested by the concept...

cheers
Xavier
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: use-revolution-bounces at lists.runrev.com 
> [mailto:use-revolution-bounces at lists.runrev.com] On Behalf Of jbv
> Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 20:40
> To: How to use Revolution
> Subject: Re: [Fr] [En] Re: French list
> 
> Well,
> 
> I don't want to sound pompous, but I'm convinced that the 
> ideas, concepts & ambitions behind the original design of 
> Xtalk languages went far beyond the idea of being a kind of 
> "Klingon"...
> It has much more to do with the way algorithms are understood 
> & memorized by newbies and other concepts in ergonomics...
> 
> Oddly this thread might take us back to another discussion 
> that pops up at times : the addition of syntactic elements 
> from other languages (x+=1 for instance)...
> I've always been opposed to that kind of idea, not because I 
> see it as an heresy nor because I'm a purist, but because I 
> don't see any reason to add background noise or useless 
> complexity to Xtalk structure...
> Some say that they're more used to "x+=1" than "add 1 to x", 
> but that's kind of weird : they're so deeply "influenced" 
> (sorry can't find a more suitable word) by their habits in 
> coding in a specific language that they feel less confortable 
> in a language that is much closer to natural english...
> 
> To jump back to the original topic of this thread, I'd like 
> to remind a good advice given by any teacher of foreign language :
> if you want to learn to speak english (or any foreign 
> language), first think in english...
> In the same vein, I don't think it's a good idea to write "a 
> flow-chart a-la-Basic" to understand an undocumented & 
> complex script...
> Better write some elegant & well documented xtalk code from 
> the beginning... IOW if you want to code in xtalk, first 
> think in xtalk...
> That's why I wrote previously : it'll make sense to have 
> french posts on this list when a french version of Transcript 
> is available...
> 
> But of course, I don't want to hinder anyone from posting in 
> the language of his/her choice... I love cultural diversity !
> 
> JB
> 
> > jbv <jbv.silences at Club-Internet.fr> wrote:
> >
> > > IMHO it will make sense to post in french (or any other
> > > language) to the list only when there's a french (or any other
> > > language) of Transcript... (grin)
> >
> > Pas d'accord ! Que le langage soit en simili-anglais ne me 
> gêne pas...
> > C'est une sorte de beche-de-mer, quoi ;-) Un peu du Klingon, pas 
> > vraiment de la litterature !
> > Un code, quoi, comme un autre, un Basic, mais plus facile à 
> comprendre 
> > !!
> >
> > Not agreed!
> > In fact, I am NOT disturbed by the pseudo-english used in 
> HyperTalk -- 
> > eeer in Transcript ;-) For me, it is a bichlamar, a Klingon, no 
> > litterature!
> > Sort of a code, as basic, but easiest!!
> >
> > > Actually, far from being a bad joke, this suggestion makes sense, 
> > > since Xtalk has been designed to be as close as possible 
> to natural 
> > > english, therefore the effort made by non-english speakers to 
> > > decypher a script is probably similar to the effort of 
> understanding 
> > > posts on the list...
> >
> > Pas d'accord non plus !! Je trouve qu'on sait facilement relire un 
> > script, meme celui de quelqu'un d'autre -- c'est tout l'interet de 
> > HyperTalk -- pardon, Transcript !
> > Si on a du mal à  lire, c'est que le script est complexe : 
> quand c'est 
> > mon propre script, avec des boucles imbriquées, je dois parfois 
> > prendre une feuille de papier, et me faire un "organigramme" à la 
> > Basic quand il s'agit d'un script que je n'ai pas touche depuis 
> > plusieurs mois (sans oublier le cas où je me demande pour 
> quelle j'ai 
> > bien pu programmer de cette façon ;->) Quant à s'exprimer et à 
> > s'expliquer avec des nuances c'est nettement plus facile dans sa 
> > langue maternelle -- et encore plus quand il s'agit de 
> l'explication 
> > de quelqu'un d'autre ;-))
> >
> > Not agreed, also!! It is easy to re-read a script, even another's 
> > person script.
> > If it is NOT easy, it's because of the script itself --for instance 
> > with nested loops. I have sometimes to take a sheet of paper, and 
> > write down a flowchart a la Basic, especially when it is a 
> months old 
> > piece of script (and I wonder how I could write such a 
> thing as that 
> > ;->) As for explain myself with subtleties, it is easier to 
> do that in 
> > my mother tongue -- and moreover if it is another's person 
> explanation 
> > ;-))
> >
> > --
> > Bilingual Revolutionario
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > use-revolution mailing list
> > use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
> 
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
>