Transcript and/or ECMA

[Rob Cozens]

Someone asked me privately if my original response to this thread was 
in opposition to the inclusion of ECMA compliance in Transcript.

For the record, my answer is "No, I posted in opposition to using 
JavaScript syntax to accomplish this."

Every development platform I have learned was designed around a 
unifying syntax.  The one exception was the Bourne (sp?) shell to 
Berkeley Unix/C.  It is a prime example of a collection of commands 
without unifying syntax: the same qualifier had different meaning 
when appended to different commands, and different commands used 
different qualifiers for the same purpose.  No wonder my colleagues 
(Berkeley CS grads) referred to it as "guru friendly" at best and 
"user hostile" at worst.

IMFO, dumping bits of JavaScript, or any other non-xTalks syntax into 
Transcript rather than extending the natural xTalk dialect can only 
hurt Revolution in the long run.
-- 

Rob Cozens
CCW, Serendipity Software Company
http://www.oenolog.net/who.htm

"And I, which was two fooles, do so grow three;
Who are a little wise, the best fooles bee."

from "The Triple Foole" by John Donne (1572-1631)