Re: AppleScript and sysodsct (was: PDF fileType)
At 3:22 AM +0100 2/3/01, Sjoerd Op 't Land wrote: OK, this worked. I'm now working on a library (in the Starter Kit, so I have to keep it short) for setting and getting file attributes. For finishing I need the AppleScript for setting file's attributes. I tried many things like this: set name of alias "HD Sjoerd:Desktop Folder:testfile" to "ttt" set name of file "HD Sjoerd:Desktop Folder:testfile" to "ttt" But I didn't succeed. The first one gave me: "Stack overflow." What does that mean? And the second (translated) ""ttt" cannot be given to the name of file "HD Sjoerd:Desktop Folder:testfile"". Try this: put "HD Sjoerd:Desktop Folder:testfile" into tPath put "ttt" into tNewName put "tell application " quote "Finder" quote " to set name of file " \ quote tPath quote "to" quote tNewName quote into tScript send tScript to program "Finder" with "sysodsct" However, I think you may be reaching some practical limits for this "sysodsct" approach. The file information example I used before used AppleScript's built-in commands. But for any serious file management stuff, you'll need to use the Finder's own dictionary of commands and objects. But if you check the result of the above "send" command, you'll probably find it returns an error (even though it carries out the task). I get errors returned on any scripts sent to the Finder that include tell application "Finder" as part of the script. I guess this is because you're asking the Finder to send appleEvents to itself, and it doesn't like this. (Just guessing, though.) Therefore, when you need to get the result from a Finder command, you're in trouble, because all you get is an error. A workaround is to send the script to a different running application that handles appleEvents, but generally the Finder is the only application that can be guaranteed to be running. I discovered on my Mac that there is a process called "Folder Actions" that is always running, and sending the script to this process works. E.g. send tScript to program "Folder Actions" with "sysodsct" But I've no idea whether "Folder Actions" runs on all Macs as a faceless process. If you save an empty AppleScript as an applet (with "Stay Open" checked), and then run that applet, you can then send scripts to it. E.g. send tScript to program "My Dead Applet" with "sysodsct" However, if you're going to need another running application to which you can send scripts, it would probably be better to compile the scripts as an AppleScript applet to start with. And it would probably be faster too. But all in all, I think the Externals Collection offers the best solutions for most situations. Cheers Dave Cragg Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to [EMAIL PROTECTED], not this list.
Re: AppleScript and sysodsct (was: PDF fileType)
My AppleScript/ MacFileAttribs library including explanation is ready. Check it out at: http://homepage.mac.com/sjoerdoptland/macfileattribs.mc Dave Cragg wrote/ schreef: Try this: put "HD Sjoerd:Desktop Folder:testfile" into tPath put "ttt" into tNewName put "tell application " quote "Finder" quote " to set name of file " \ quote tPath quote "to" quote tNewName quote into tScript send tScript to program "Finder" with "sysodsct" Thanks, it work like a charm. Regards, Sjoerd Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to [EMAIL PROTECTED], not this list.
Launching browsers, again
From time to time on this list, someone posts "How do I launch a browser cross-platform", and some kind soul posts the latest script he's been using. Interestingly, many of the scripts differ in regards to the registry entry they check to get the path to the browser, and no matter which one I use it seems that eventually I get some user who writes to me to say that his browser doesn't launch. Shouldn't there be a single registry entry that is the obvious best choice? I know we're talking about MS here, but it seems odd that the confidence about which call to make is relatively low. And on the Mac, for similarly flakey reasons, the OS sometimes fails to produce results unless everything is just so. So here's da question: What is the most reliable way to launch a browser to a given URL on both Mac and Windows? Also, what specific factors should we be looking at in the event that Netscape or some other non-MS browser is installed as the default? -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Media Corporation Multimedia Design and Development for Mac, Windows, UNIX, and the Web _ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.FourthWorld.com Tel: 323-225-3717 ICQ#60248349Fax: 323-225-0716 Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to [EMAIL PROTECTED], not this list.
Re: Sockets vs. POST
While working on some routines to send POST data to CGIs, I'm having some trouble getting the data in the right format... What kind of trouble? Trouble with extracting the posted data ? Trouble with the encoding of 8-bit ASCII chars ? 1. Would it be any easier to take control over the whole transaction by using sockets instead of relying on MC's POST? My first hunch is that it would not... Your hunch is correct. Sockets are much more complicated because they are at a lower level of abstraction, e.g. more details to attend to than would normally be the case when the process is handled for you. ... but it's been a bear dealing with some CGIs. I recommend you duke it out with the CGI protocol some more before giving up on this relatively easy protocol. Unless, of course, you have some very special protocol needs that CGI is not designed to handle or to handle-well. IOW, with sockets, you could create your own custom communication protocol. A protocol that doesn't have all of the un-necessary overhead of CGI, for example. You could conceivably create a protocol custom-made for MetaCard stacks to communicate via the Internet in their own native-tongue. Just a random thought ;-) Alain Farmer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Webmail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/ Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to [EMAIL PROTECTED], not this list.
Re: AppleScript and sysodsct (was: PDF fileType)
Now what would be real useful is to use this to set the "File Exchange" preferences so the user wouldn't have to... Same for the Browsers and their Mime types: Alain? From: "Sjoerd Op 't Land" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 18:37:14 +0100 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: AppleScript and sysodsct (was: PDF fileType) My AppleScript/ MacFileAttribs library including explanation is ready. Check it out at: http://homepage.mac.com/sjoerdoptland/macfileattribs.mc Dave Cragg wrote/ schreef: Try this: put "HD Sjoerd:Desktop Folder:testfile" into tPath put "ttt" into tNewName put "tell application " quote "Finder" quote " to set name of file " \ quote tPath quote "to" quote tNewName quote into tScript send tScript to program "Finder" with "sysodsct" Thanks, it work like a charm. Regards, Sjoerd Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to [EMAIL PROTECTED], not this list. Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to [EMAIL PROTECTED], not this list.
Re: Sockets vs. POST
While working on some routines to send POST data to CGIs, I'm having some trouble getting the data in the right format... What kind of trouble? Trouble with extracting the posted data ? Trouble with the encoding of 8-bit ASCII chars ? Mostly that the server is reporting that the header contains invalid data. Yesterday's error was that I'm missing a semicolon somewhere, but in reviewing the Interarchy dump I can't find a semicolon present when I use a browser that is not present when I make the same call from MC. :( 1. Would it be any easier to take control over the whole transaction by using sockets instead of relying on MC's POST? My first hunch is that it would not... Your hunch is correct. Sockets are much more complicated because they are at a lower level of abstraction, e.g. more details to attend to than would normally be the case when the process is handled for you. That's encouraging. It seems silly to reproduce the whole protocol just because of header errors. ... but it's been a bear dealing with some CGIs. I recommend you duke it out with the CGI protocol some more before giving up on this relatively easy protocol. Unless, of course, you have some very special protocol needs that CGI is not designed to handle or to handle-well. IOW, with sockets, you could create your own custom communication protocol. A protocol that doesn't have all of the un-necessary overhead of CGI, for example. You could conceivably create a protocol custom-made for MetaCard stacks to communicate via the Internet in their own native-tongue. If only. For this project I need to perform the same calls that a browser makes, only from MC instead of a browser. For all other projects, I'd love to use MC on the server side as well, but I haven't found a shared hosting service that will let me do that. If the only alternative is to quintuple my hosting costs with colocation I'd rather just continue using Perl. -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Media Corporation Multimedia Design and Development for Mac, Windows, UNIX, and the Web _ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.FourthWorld.com Tel: 323-225-3717 ICQ#60248349Fax: 323-225-0716 Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to [EMAIL PROTECTED], not this list.
No Subject
unsubscribe
Re: Sockets vs. POST
From: Richard Gaskin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 12:44:10 -0800 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Sockets vs. POST What kind of trouble? Trouble with extracting the posted data ? Trouble with the encoding of 8-bit ASCII chars ? Mostly that the server is reporting that the header contains invalid data. Yesterday's error was that I'm missing a semicolon somewhere, but in reviewing the Interarchy dump I can't find a semicolon present when I use a browser that is not present when I make the same call from MC. :( What would be really nice is to have something which would analyse tow text files and colourize the bits that differed. This is the sort of thing that you need to do with matching genetic sequences, so I'm sure the algorithms are out there (Xavier -:), but an nice scriptable app would be a boon. Anyone know of one? NB: five times the hosting costs for a dedicated server works out the same price for 5 people if my maths is right. If you include me that leaves 3 more @ $20 a month. I remember reading this thing about those "freeways" in the States, where everyone drives the same speed? Well in California apparently they closed one of the lanes to everyone - save those cars with 4 or more people in them; worked a treat with those willing to share zipping along - getting to work much faster. Any Californians out there? Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to [EMAIL PROTECTED], not this list.
