Constellation's Great, But the Rev IDE Doesn't Suck
ambassador at fourthworld.com
Tue Oct 18 12:50:36 CDT 2005
Charles Hartman wrote:
> On Oct 18, 2005, at 1:01 PM, Dan Shafer wrote:
>>> 2. The documentaion is still poor.
>> I disagree, but that is certainly a matter of judgment. I think the
>> docs are somewhere between quite adequate and excellent depending on
>> the topic. Spotty to be sure, but "poor"? I don't think so.
> (as still a beginner who needs the Docs a lot) I agree that they're
> very good -- it's just that they are *deathly* slow. Not for a "filter
> with" in the Dictionary (though I appreciate the D&M gadget for that
> anyway), but for the Topics.
Agreed. Great content (faaaaaaaaaaaar more extensive than what comes in
the box with Director and most other apps from the major publishers),
but the shell's emphasis of using well-formed XML over a more efficient
storage/indexing format creates unnecessary impediments relative to the
lightning performance of Rev's native object model.
In the Files section of the MC IDE working group there's a shell a
couple of us built which suck up the thousands of tiny Transcript
Dictionary files and imports them into a single stack using Rev's native
objects for storage -- mcTranscriptDict.mc.sit at:
If there's sufficient interest and joining the group to get one file
seems annoying, I can mirror that file at a simpler location.
Managing Editor, revJournal
Rev tips, tutorials and more: http://www.revJournal.com
More information about the use-livecode