Subject: Drawing a curved shape - 2nd attempt

Mark Smith lists at futilism.com
Mon Feb 2 09:08:04 EST 2009


Randall, wondering aloud about features is welcome (at least as far  
as I'm concerned, and I'm sure to most of us), it's just that phrases  
like "limp xtalk into the present' come off as kind of  
confrontational. The general style on this list is very much non- 
confrontational - you wouldn't be the first person to get a raised- 
eyebrow response to that kind of talk, just please don't take it the  
wrong way!

It seems to me that some of the things you talk about would be better  
addressed on the improve list, rather than the how-to list, but you  
need an enterprise licence to join that list.

BTW, self-optimizing multi-threading sounds very interesting - was it  
in Revolution? If so, anything you can share?

Best,

Mark


On 2 Feb 2009, at 13:26, Randall Reetz wrote:

> I have never asked for a game server.  I dont build games... Have  
> never even played one.  Secondly, yes i do keep hoping and praying  
> and asking for features that would extend the original user-level  
> programming ethos of allan kay and bill atkenson to the modern  
> world we live in.  Sockets are to xtalk what a machine shop is to  
> an erector set.
> All of you should be agreeing with me, not fighting me.  These  
> things i ask for are obvious ways for xtalk to do for today's  
> computing world what smalltalk and hypertalk did for the mid  
> 1980's.  Namely, to wrap deep functionality into a pedestrian  
> common english syntax.  To un-socket sockets as it were.  I am  
> writing deep pattern engine and symantic engine in xtalk, so dont  
> dare say i am unwilling to go the coding distance.  I have written  
> self optimized multithreading into xtalk.  I wrote a symantic  
> indexing system into xtalk.  I have written a full resolution  
> independent 3D engine in xtalk.  But what i find it dificult to do  
> is write the same code everyone else is writing just to limp xtalk  
> into the present.  That goes so counter to the original intent of  
> xtalk.  How is the rev product threatened by deep thinking people  
> wondering aloud what features would make xtalk that much more  
> powerful and contemporary?
>
>



More information about the Use-livecode mailing list