LiveCode 4.6.1 message path and behaviors

[Todd Geist]

This last little post by Richard makes me think of JavaScript, The Good
Parts, by Douglas Crawford.

Crawford lays out a case for which parts of JavScript should be used and
which are to be avoided at all cost.  I wonder if something similar could be
done with LiveCode.  Or perhaps just a guide to what parts can be left
behind.

For example, I am reasonably certain that I will never need to write code
that is compatible with HyperCard, So does that mean that I never need to
use Send, and I can always use Dispatch?

Todd




On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 11:03 AM, Richard Gaskin <ambassador at fourthworld.com
> wrote:
>
>
> There is a sense of theory about LiveCode's language, but it's equally
> saddled by a richly varied history.
>
> The difference between "send" and "dispatch" is a good example:
>
> IMO (and perhaps most people's) the syntax for including arguments with
> "send" is beautiful in its simplicity:
>
>   dispatch "SomeMessage" to "SomeObject" with tSomeVariable
>
> Send is much funkier, requiring you to send the variable name as part of
> the string being sent:
>
>   send "SomeMessage tSomeVariable" to "SomeObject"
>
>
> The "send" command first appeared in HyperTalk more than 20 years ago, so
> when it was added to LiveCode the implementation remained the same for
> compatibility.
>
> But once RunRev identified a need for a different message like "dispatch",
> unencumbered by historic compatibility they were free to use more graceful
> syntax.
>
> It might be nice if "send" could be enhanced in a future version to use the
> "with" token to passing arguments, but with so many priorities to address
> this will likely have to wait.
>
> So in the meantime we have one of a few such anomalies in the language.
>
> --

Todd Geist
------------------------------
geist interactive <http://www.geistinteractive.com>
805-419-9382