synonyms

Lagi Pittas iphonelagi at gmail.com
Tue Jun 27 17:21:48 EDT 2017


Thanks Richard,

Actually I like the idea it's exactly what Bret Victor said was needed in
languages I post this link again nobody commented on it the last time

Are you listening  Mark?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUv66718DII

Still would like to know if the additional parsers/lexers ideas have any
traction as a crowdfunding to the python/Javascript/Ruby people - they
would probably pay for something that spit out the code they needed to run
a Gui on desktop - NO QT - it's a dog's breakfast of calls, maybe you can
program lots of stuff with it - but I can also build a house out of lolly
sticks and spit.
Regards lagi

On 27 June 2017 at 19:19, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode <
use-livecode at lists.runrev.com> wrote:

> Lagi Pittas wrote:
>
> We are still awaiting the open language that was promised.
>>
>> Now I don't know exactly how that will work in the sense is it going to be
>> all or nothing - a free for all where you can add/change  syntax more like
>> a souped up preprocessor, or allow for change to a different language
>> (python, Ruby, php on a per procedure/function basis or the easier first
>>  step a script only stack in the language of your choice.
>>
>> Everyone can have their cake and eat it.
>>
>
> I don't know when OL will be available or how it'll work.  I only know one
> thing it won't support, based on an earlier conversation with Mark
> Waddingham:  R-style arguments (similar in many respects to CSS values).
>
> In R, things like the plot command have reasonably-useful defaults, so
> that you can just pass in data with nothing else and get a useful result.
>
> But if you want to tailor it you pass arguments in as name-value pairs,
> e.g.:
>
>   plot(cars, type="o", col="blue", ylim=c(0,12))
>
> What I like about that is I'm free from having to remember parameter
> order, which also means I don't need to add a hundred commas if I want to
> pass in a value for the 101st param.
>
> With name-value pairs I can include only the options I want, and in any
> order.
>
> Extra bonus points that the purpose of any argument is made explicit by
> including its name.  If I see "o" I don't need to count commas and guess
> about what that applies to, I know very clearly looking at the name
> provided with it that it governs the plot type.
>
> This may be even more verbose than xTalk for handlers with just one or two
> args.
>
> And as much as I like it in R, I'm not sure I would advocate it in an
> xTalk as any sort of necessity.  It might be ideal for certain types of
> commands (oh how I'd love it with "export"), but is so unusual compared to
> most other languages that it may just increase the learning curve for most
> folks.
>
> I bring it up here not as a recommendation, but just as a sort of "think
> REALLY different" exercise as we consider alternative syntax
> possibilities...
>
> --
>  Richard Gaskin
>  Fourth World Systems
>  Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
>  ____________________________________________________________________
>  Ambassador at FourthWorld.com                http://www.FourthWorld.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>



More information about the use-livecode mailing list