Dependence on Programming Experts

[Viktoras Didziulis]

 Brian, this is definitely something usable! Many other programming
languages support alternative syntaxes through inlining the code without
tackling with the engine in any way. Such inline capabilities are ensured
solely by external modules. E.g. one can inline C or ASM into a Perl program
 so that it even gets compiled and executed when high speed processing is
needed. Same can be said about other languages that can be inlined. If you
go to www.cpan.org then you will face the amount of modules implementing
diverse functionality in Perl. There are 401 inline modules alone
(http://search.cpan.org/search?query=inline&mode=all) ! So in Perl you just
write use Inline C and start writing in C... I am not advocating Perl here,
but this is something to grasp on as a good example of modularity and
flexibility:
1) having open and searchable repository of Revolution modules like www.cpan
org accessible by everyone, not just by owners of the product.
2) taking some time and creating externals for inlines and any other
additional functionality to put there for public use
 
With library this should be possible:
start using stack "MathLib"
x=field "x"
y=field "y"
z=x+y
answer z;
 
or automatically relate script variables with fields, so we could skip
assignement of field values and write 
start using stack "MathLib"
z=x+y
answer z;
 while MathLib would take care about translating x, y and z to corresponding
fields on the stack (field "x", field "y" and field "z")
 
Now compare:
the assembly
mov ax, 5
mov bx, 7
add ax, bx
and the transcript:
put 5 into x
put 7 into y
add y to x
 
So time ago this type of syntax lead to creation of high level languages
that could understand z=x+y directly. No wonder the same discussion starts
on this list from time to time ;-)
 
Just 2 cents from
Viktoras
 
 
-------Original Message------- 
 
From: Brian Yennie 
Date: 07/14/06 07:12:07 
To: How to use Revolution 
Subject: Re: Dependence on Programming Experts 
 
For fun, try inserting this as a front script: 
 
on returnInField 
get offset(("field "&quote&"script"&quote&" of card 
"&quote&"revscript"&quote), the long name of the target) 
if (it = 1) then 
put word 2 of the selectedLine into lineNum 
put line (lineNum) of fld "script" of card "revscript" into prevLine 
if (token 2 of prevLine is "=") then 
put ("put"&&(token 3 to -1 of prevLine)&&"into"&&(token 1 of 
prevLine)) into line (lineNum) of fld "script" of card "revscript" 
select empty 
send "revFormatField lineNum,lineNum" to card "revscript" 
select after line (lineNum) of fld "script" of card "revscript" 
end if 
end if 
pass returnInField 
end returnInField 
 
Now edit any script and enter "x=5" or some other simple assignment on 
a line by itself. Hit return. Voila, translation to "verbose" =)! 
 
I'm sure there are various ways a plugin could use this sort of magic 
to allow customized syntax, without needing changes to the Rev engine. 
It would just become a script editor convenience. You could always trap 
script editing messages to even hide the conversion rather than 
converting it on the fly. 
 
- Brian 
 
_______________________________________________ 
use-revolution mailing list 
use-revolution at lists.runrev.com 
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences: 
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution