richmondmathewson at gmail.com
Wed Jan 4 09:14:53 CET 2017
Thank you for a very clear explanation which improved the taste of my
breakfast no end.
Although . . . it still doesn't quite explain why we need LCB to do some
"heavy lifting": why can LC
not be extended to encompass that?
On 1/3/17 11:40 pm, J. Landman Gay wrote:
> On 1/3/17 1:54 PM, Richmond Mathewson wrote:
>> I wonder how many programmers are going to spend their money on LiveCode
>> if they are aware that at a certain point they are going to have to
>> leverage one or more other programming languages to achieve
>> certain things.
> No one needs to learn any other language. Since the LC team
> understands that most users don't want to learn lower-level languages
> like C++, they've provided an intermediate language -- LCB -- that
> meets the requirement halfway. For those who know or don't mind
> learning C or its variants, they can tap directly into OS frameworks
> to achieve even more.
> None of this means that you yourself need to actually write those
> things, or that the capabilities of LC have somehow diminished. It
> isn't any different than writing externals, which have been around
> forever and which we use with abandon without understanding a single
> line of the underlying code.
More information about the use-livecode