>At 2:38 PM -0800 on 11/29/99, Alain Farmer wrote:
>>Anthony: Perhaps:
>>HyperCard's abs of <expr>
>>
>>Alain: I like yours better. I would merely add that
>>the "HyperCard's" keyword is optional, like this :
>>
>>[HyperCard's] abs of <expr>
>>
>>1. abs of <expr> -- traverses the hierarchy
>>2. HyperCard's abs of <expr> -- does not traverse
Michael: Rather than adding a specialized keyword to
handle this _one_ specific case, can we identify the
domain that this functionality lives in and then create
a more generic syntax that handles it?
Maybe something like:
abs of <expr> [by [not] traversing]
(Or perhaps there are other things aside from just
traversal that would be important... Maybe there
are multiple ways to traverse to heirarchy and
the scripter could choose one using this syntax)
Michael: This brings me to a question. I believe I
represent a very small percentage of people at the
moment who see the potential for using languages
like NuTalk as our primary full time programming
language for all our programming needs. Some people
are developing interpreters for C and C++, while I
would rather see a compiler for xTalks.
Michael: Right now I am in the middle of choosing
whether or not this project is the right project for
me at this time. I looked over my posts to this list
and have found that most of what I have been
proposing has been trying to force my agenda onto
this project. I am committed to having a generic
english like language to do all my programming in
and realize that if the people I am with aren't
committed to the same thing then I should be on
a different project and owe you guys an apology.
Michael: I am proposing we separate the language
from the xTalk world and treat it like a lower level
object oriented programming language which will use
libraries to implement most the functionality.
Buttons, stacks, fields, etc. will not be first
class language keywords, but rather entities within
a library that has added those words to the system
in a well defined way. NuTalk will be a completely
separate language from the NuCard product and will
only be related because NuCard standalone's are
implemented using the NuTalk language.
Much like 'C' is to UNIX.
There are no keywords in 'C' specifically for the
UNIX operating system. It is a generic programming
language. Programmers have implemented libraries
which create the UNIX specific features. The main
difference I see is that the tools haven't been
created for me to create a little UNIX standalone
executable to be run on any computer (although it
could be done).
Michael: Now if this is something the members of the
NuCard project aren't interested in, and they would
prefer collapsing NuTalk to be a language specificly
for NuCard then I can accept that and would take the
opportunity to go find a new project because I
wouldn't provide much value here. OTH if people
would be excited to create a generic programming
language with those of us who are inspired by the
idea of one english like programming language for
all our needs, then I believe I am in the right
place to make that happen.
Michael: So I don't know who to ask this question
to, but I would like to know if you folks agree
that NuTalk the language should be treated as its
very own programming language completely separate
from the NuCard project, or do you think the two
should be collapsed together?
-- Michael --
------------------------------------------------------------
CNM Network Internet Services
Connect... Get More... Pay less...
Telephony - Dial-Up - DSL - Web Hosting - Co-Location
http://www.cnmnetwork.com - 1-800-953-5556
------------------------------------------------------------
