Made with . . .

Richmond Mathewson richmondmathewson at
Wed Aug 2 17:33:36 EDT 2017

That's a very good explanation,

Thank you very much indeed.

I had a "small problem" with a teenager in my programming classes who asked:

"If Livecode is written using C++ why don't we just bypass Livecode 

Which prove that his English is up to a high standard :)

I found a book in a junk shop that was an introduction to C++ and sent 
him home with it and asked
him to start teaching himself C++ and to duplicate the simplest exercise 
stacks we were doing in the classes.

On the Monday he turned up with a big box of chocolates for me and an 

I will be forever grateful to the Livecode team that they have saved me 
from having to learn C++.


On 8/2/17 9:07 pm, Mark Waddingham via use-livecode wrote:
> Increasingly less - and in contrast the amount that could be done in LC instead of C++ continues to increase (far more slowly than I'd like - but hey, if wishes were horses...)
> Indeed, a lot of the 'heavy lifting' seen in the engine comes down to either the core abstractions which the LiveCode script language requires (i.e. the VM), direct access to C exposed APIs, or for speed.
> For example a lot of 'compound' operations such as the set operation commands can be implemented in LCS - indeed it is a very readable way to define their behaviour - but become far more effective for large arrays if done in C++ (i.e. for optimisation purposes). Although that is largely because we don't have a native code compiler for LCS.
> LCB has started to provide more of what is needed to 'get away from C++' - admittedly its performance is not great as yet, but for its current purposes it is more than sufficient. In particular, UI elements generally require little 'hardcore' performance - just rendering and property marshalling; similarly, wrapping system and third-party APIs to the level where they are 'more natural' in LCS mainly just requires appropriate type mapping and indexing of objects (enter LCB).
> LiveCode Script is a complete programming language in its own right; it lacks direct access to third-party APIs certainly, however it is perhaps surprising how much outside of user interaction related tasks require that. Even in 7+, it's speed is perfectly reasonable for 'reasonably sized' computational tasks (for certain types of thing it is actually much more memory efficient due to copy on write being used for values - which increase the memory size of tasks, if not speed).
> As a mode of expression of algorithms, it perhaps start to approach Knuth's idea of 'literate programming' *without* using a blended typesetting + code approach (which is how TeX and MetaFont are written, for example).
> So, if for that reason alone there's rarely harm in writing something in LCS first, and *then* taking to rewrite critical parts in a lower level language if required for speed reasons.
> Warmest Regards,
> Mark.
> Sent from my iPhone
>> On 2 Aug 2017, at 13:50, Klaus major-k via use-livecode <use-livecode at> wrote:
>> Hi Richmond,
>>> Am 02.08.2017 um 13:43 schrieb Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode <use-livecode at>:
>>> " remember that LC is made with LC, so everything in the IDE is a stack resp. scripted and can be modified!"
>>> recently claimed by someone elsewhere [Hi, Klaus :) ]
>> hi mate! :-)
>>> BUT: it that really true?
>>> Why do I have a funny feeling that a lot of the "heavy lifting" is done with C++ ?
>> Yes, that is true, except for the engine and its functionality which is made with C++ or whatever.
>>> Richmond.
>> Best
>> Klaus
>> --
>> Klaus Major
>> klaus at
>> _______________________________________________
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> use-livecode at
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:

More information about the Use-livecode mailing list