Sabin Densmore wrote: >> ... but I believe that Sabin is referring to the fact that a Mac >> user normally doesn't start an application and then open a file >> within that application, but simply double-clicks on a document >> (file) and the appropriate application is automatically launched >> and the file is loaded (or run, as appropriate). > > > Yep. :) > > That is *exactly* what I'm talking about. And, since OS X doesn't have > a Rebol/View port yet, the only option I have is to open terminal, run > rebol and then call the script. Or, call the script as an argument to > the rebol command from terminal -- either is clumsy for the average user. > > So, if you want to try and replace Watson with Rebol, there has to be > a) an OS X native Rebol/View app, b) a method by which to associate a > stand-alone Rebol/View script with a user's pre-existing Rebol/View > app. Perhaps someway to package the Rebol/View application and the > script as a single download? > > >The "magic" that runs AppleScript (or any other truly Mac-aware > >language) works in that fashion. > > Right :) Not magic, but a process that happens when an application is > native to the OS it is running on. > > This seems to be a weakness with Rebol -- requiring the user to have > the development kit installed along with the script you are > distributing. Though, it's not a big weakness, because of the small > footprint of Rebol in general -- but it did keep me from doing > something Rebol does well on Mac OS X.
Its BIG weakness of MacOS in fact, which is known to be even more hybrid, than Windows (sorry Joel ;-) If you can't create any type of batch file, shortcut, whatever, telling it to launch View + appropriate script, then well ... :-) -pekr- > > > sd > -- To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the subject, without the quotes.
