coming soon in TAOO... A multi-lingual script editor (with a line ruler even!)
The old metacard script editor i made long ago is still light years ahead of RunRevs despite 2 years of dust. So im working on it on it again because i need a scripting boost again (with extensible language extensions present in taoo). Features: dictionaries, fully normal and working customizeable script-coloring, keyword or expression translations, auto-styling, java, c php, basic, javascript, flash code translations (or just editing), incredible variety of indexes for all script/code structures, flowcharts, keywords, filters, searches, really-smart auto-completion, pretype in-field (no extra commands), to name a few... Should be out in a month or two... The RevGM prevented any rev-release... Any ideas on self-testing scripts are welcome... I just thought of a gui-quality-manager/testing agent... First item in the list was - find the put statements or some common script errors... RevGM errors in stacks, breakpoints, etc... Im sure many could be interested by the concept... cheers Xavier > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of jbv > Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 20:40 > To: How to use Revolution > Subject: Re: [Fr] [En] Re: French list > > Well, > > I don't want to sound pompous, but I'm convinced that the > ideas, concepts & ambitions behind the original design of > Xtalk languages went far beyond the idea of being a kind of > "Klingon"... > It has much more to do with the way algorithms are understood > & memorized by newbies and other concepts in ergonomics... > > Oddly this thread might take us back to another discussion > that pops up at times : the addition of syntactic elements > from other languages (x+=1 for instance)... > I've always been opposed to that kind of idea, not because I > see it as an heresy nor because I'm a purist, but because I > don't see any reason to add background noise or useless > complexity to Xtalk structure... > Some say that they're more used to "x+=1" than "add 1 to x", > but that's kind of weird : they're so deeply "influenced" > (sorry can't find a more suitable word) by their habits in > coding in a specific language that they feel less confortable > in a language that is much closer to natural english... > > To jump back to the original topic of this thread, I'd like > to remind a good advice given by any teacher of foreign language : > if you want to learn to speak english (or any foreign > language), first think in english... > In the same vein, I don't think it's a good idea to write "a > flow-chart a-la-Basic" to understand an undocumented & > complex script... > Better write some elegant & well documented xtalk code from > the beginning... IOW if you want to code in xtalk, first > think in xtalk... > That's why I wrote previously : it'll make sense to have > french posts on this list when a french version of Transcript > is available... > > But of course, I don't want to hinder anyone from posting in > the language of his/her choice... I love cultural diversity ! > > JB > > > jbv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > IMHO it will make sense to post in french (or any other > > > language) to the list only when there's a french (or any other > > > language) of Transcript... (grin) > > > > Pas d'accord ! Que le langage soit en simili-anglais ne me > g�ne pas... > > C'est une sorte de beche-de-mer, quoi ;-) Un peu du Klingon, pas > > vraiment de la litterature ! > > Un code, quoi, comme un autre, un Basic, mais plus facile � > comprendre > > !! > > > > Not agreed! > > In fact, I am NOT disturbed by the pseudo-english used in > HyperTalk -- > > eeer in Transcript ;-) For me, it is a bichlamar, a Klingon, no > > litterature! > > Sort of a code, as basic, but easiest!! > > > > > Actually, far from being a bad joke, this suggestion makes sense, > > > since Xtalk has been designed to be as close as possible > to natural > > > english, therefore the effort made by non-english speakers to > > > decypher a script is probably similar to the effort of > understanding > > > posts on the list... > > > > Pas d'accord non plus !! Je trouve qu'on sait facilement relire un > > script, meme celui de quelqu'un d'autre -- c'est tout l'interet de > > HyperTalk -- pardon, Transcript ! > > Si on a du mal � lire, c'est que le script est complexe : > quand c'est > > mon propre script, avec des boucles imbriqu�es, je dois parfois > > prendre une feuille de papier, et me faire un "organigramme" � la > > Basic quand il s'agit d'un script que je n'ai pas touche depuis > > plusieurs mois (sans oublier le cas o� je me demande pour > quelle j'ai > > bien pu programmer de cette fa�on ;->) Quant � s'exprimer et � > > s'expliquer avec des nuances c'est nettement plus facile dans sa > > langue maternelle -- et encore plus quand il s'agit de > l'explication > > de quelqu'un d'autre ;-)) > > > > Not agreed, also!! It is easy to re-read a script, even another's > > person script. > > If it is NOT easy, it's because of the script itself --for instance > > with nested loops. I have sometimes to take a sheet of paper, and > > write down a flowchart a la Basic, especially when it is a > months old > > piece of script (and I wonder how I could write such a > thing as that > > ;->) As for explain myself with subtleties, it is easier to > do that in > > my mother tongue -- and moreover if it is another's person > explanation > > ;-)) > > > > -- > > Bilingual Revolutionario > > > > _______________________________________________ > > use-revolution mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution > > _______________________________________________ > use-revolution mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution > _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [email protected] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
