Yen-Ju Chen wrote:
Workflow.app sounds good to me and clear indicates what it is doing.
I guess Workflow does describe the apps function better. Does anybody
else have an opinion on this?
I'm sorry, I must not have explained myself well. I meant that
Workflow.app would use StepTalk but it would only be able to generate Io
code, and therefore only use the Io bundle for StepTalk. I do agree with
you on all the points you have made below.
Other languages may be implemented eventually, but only if they use the
same, or a similar object modal as Io.
The workflow app, however, will probably only create Io code (as apposed
to other StepTalk languages) since my design relies heavily on Io's
features.
To be clear, StepTalk is merely a framework.
It can support any language if a language bundle is supplied.
We have an unmaintained Io bundle for it.
If you only use Io, not StepTalk frameowork,
it is harder to talk across several applications,
say getting text from a mail in GNUMail.app
and put it into a document in Typewriter.app.
In this case, you need a public API from GNUMail and Typewriter.
StepTalk provides a machenism for applications to publish their API
and for script languages to access these applications.
Anyway, when you start to work on your application, you will realize it.
And maybe I am wrong. :D
The bottom line is that your application can still create Io code in
the end.
But in order to have this script run, StepTalk is needed.
_______________________________________________
Etoile-discuss mailing list
Etoile-discuss@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/etoile-discuss
