On Tue, 15 Jun 1999, Doug Simons wrote:
>
> keith martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Using 'by' and 'delimiter' still only makes true 'linguistical' sense for
> >me when written: 'item 2 [of container 1] delimited by myDel'. Saying 'by
> >delimiter myDel' isn't *too* bad, but... <sigh>
> >
> >Let me start again... What would a complete line of script look like? Which
> >is better? How do they abbreviate?
> >
> > put item 2 by delimiter "/" of field 1
> > put item 1 by del "/" of fld 1
> > put item 1 del "/" of fld 1
> >or
> > put item 2 of field 1 delimited by "/"
> > put item 2 of fld 1 by del "/"
> > put item 2 of fld 1 del "/"
> >or even
> > put item 2 of field 1 using delimiter "/"
> > put item 2 of fld 1 using del "/"
> > put item 2 of fld 1 del "/"
> >
> >Oh, I don't know. This is all getting a little cloudy and 'woods for trees'.
>
> Personally, I favor "using", possibly with an optional "delimiter" (but not "del" --
>it sounds too much like "delete" and doesn't need an abbreviation if it's optional
>anyway). But it should be part of the item chunk itself, like so:
>
> put item 2 using "/" of field 1
> put item 2 using delimiter "/" of field 1
> put item 1 using "." of last item using "/" of fullpath into filename
This is a good point: Currently only one item is allowed in a chunk
expression, but if we add this feature you'll want to be able to use
it for multiple items in the same expression. So the "by" or "using"
must immediately follow the item chunk and can't be at the end of the
string.
> I also particularly like Ruediger zu Dohna's suggestion (in fact I was about to
>offer the same idea), which is very compact and quite readable:
>
> put "/"-item 2 of field 1
> put "."-item 1 of last "/"-item of fullpath into filename
>
> That's my "vote".
Yech. It looks like you're subtracting items from literals to me.
Now that I think about it, it's not even possible to support this
because of this possibility:
put "5" - item 1 of field 1
> Doug Simons
> Thoughtful Software
>
********************************************************
Scott Raney [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.metacard.com
MetaCard: You know, there's an easier way to do that...
