RE: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
Does this mean i am getting old? -Original Message- From: "Richard Gaskin" To: "How to use Revolution" Sent: 12/22/2008 9:43 PM Subject: Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions... I've agreed with you before, and I won't change my opinion now: I still agree with you. My post was merely a response to the one small part of your many posts today in which it seemed you had not yet fully grasped the sweeping scope of unique enhancements Rev has brought to the xTalk family of languages. It seems you have. I think I'd just lost sight of whatever point this thread once had. My mistake. May we consider this horse sufficiently pulverized? My hatchet is buried. I'm going to go do some Christmas now. I hope you enjoy yours too. -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Media Corporation ___ ambassa...@fourthworld.com http://www.FourthWorld.com Randall Lee Reetz wrote: > Richard, > > I just don't think a language is significantly different because it > has more or less words than it had at one time. What distinguishes a > language from other languages is structural, grammatical, syntactic. > Both spanish and english acquire new lexicon all the time... rarely > does this new vocabulary require a rewrite of the grammatical rules > that sit at each language's base. Nobody looking at Rev's script > would ever say it wasn't an xtalk language. Adding a load of new > words and functions doesn't change this, never will. None of what I > am saying is an evaluation of Rev. The reason both SuperCard and Rev > can make available hyperCard stack translators is because of this > structural kinship. It is a badge of honor. Every time a new domain > specific version of C comes out, i role my eyes and groan. You can't > make a purse out of a sow's ear. Garbage in garbage out. XTalk > heritage is a selling point! Adding functionality on top... well > that is even better. It matters what sits under and supports any new > functionality. > > I am certainly not saying that xTalk is the end-all-be-all language. > The future holds promise (I hope). What I am saying is that a > flexible natural language syntax leverages human cognition and > learned abilities... enabling a short learning curve and the ability > to concentrate on problem domain instead of tool domain. Allan Kay > and Bill Atkinson understood and honored this premise. > > I don't need to be sold on the positive attributes of Rev. The > problems I have had with SuperCard have nothing to do with the > product. I love supercard! And nothing at all to do with its > development team (person). The organization is too small for decent > product development funding. And, (from what I have been told) the > product is owned by a group that does not own access to all of the > kernel upon which it is built. > > Randall > > > On Dec 22, 2008, at 10:41 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote: > >> Randall Lee Reetz wrote: [truncated by sender] ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
I've agreed with you before, and I won't change my opinion now: I still agree with you. My post was merely a response to the one small part of your many posts today in which it seemed you had not yet fully grasped the sweeping scope of unique enhancements Rev has brought to the xTalk family of languages. It seems you have. I think I'd just lost sight of whatever point this thread once had. My mistake. May we consider this horse sufficiently pulverized? My hatchet is buried. I'm going to go do some Christmas now. I hope you enjoy yours too. -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Media Corporation ___ ambassa...@fourthworld.com http://www.FourthWorld.com Randall Lee Reetz wrote: Richard, I just don't think a language is significantly different because it has more or less words than it had at one time. What distinguishes a language from other languages is structural, grammatical, syntactic. Both spanish and english acquire new lexicon all the time... rarely does this new vocabulary require a rewrite of the grammatical rules that sit at each language's base. Nobody looking at Rev's script would ever say it wasn't an xtalk language. Adding a load of new words and functions doesn't change this, never will. None of what I am saying is an evaluation of Rev. The reason both SuperCard and Rev can make available hyperCard stack translators is because of this structural kinship. It is a badge of honor. Every time a new domain specific version of C comes out, i role my eyes and groan. You can't make a purse out of a sow's ear. Garbage in – garbage out. XTalk heritage is a selling point! Adding functionality on top... well that is even better. It matters what sits under and supports any new functionality. I am certainly not saying that xTalk is the end-all-be-all language. The future holds promise (I hope). What I am saying is that a flexible natural language syntax leverages human cognition and learned abilities... enabling a short learning curve and the ability to concentrate on problem domain instead of tool domain. Allan Kay and Bill Atkinson understood and honored this premise. I don't need to be sold on the positive attributes of Rev. The problems I have had with SuperCard have nothing to do with the product. I love supercard! And nothing at all to do with its development team (person). The organization is too small for decent product development funding. And, (from what I have been told) the product is owned by a group that does not own access to all of the kernel upon which it is built. Randall On Dec 22, 2008, at 10:41 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote: Randall Lee Reetz wrote: As I said, there are important aspects of the Revolution product that ARE unique... the use and GUI centered IDE, the multi- platform develop and publish flexibility, the viability of the user community and this online support group, the stability of the company and the rapidity and reliability of the pace of version development cycle, the constant evolution of the product in lockstep with platform evolution, etc. But the subject was the scripting language itself. While of course Revolution is just one implementation in the xTalk family of languages, its specific dialect at this point is probably 30% or even 40% or more unique, or at least distinct from the Mother Tongue, HyperTalk. If we exclude all externals (since they were written in other languages) and look only at what's natively in the engine, it might even be the case that Rev has added as many new tokens as were in the entire HyperTalk 2.x language. All tokens related to arrays, sockets, URLs, new forms of repeat, icons in ask and answer, scrollbars, color, blendlevels, images, groups, gradients, aliases, system color and folder pickers, compression/decompression, binary file I/O, binary operators, Unicode, window modes, mouseMove and other messages, buffer control, video playback, QTVR control, drag-and-drop, executionContexts and other debugging/logging info, script-local vars, animated GIFs, image export formats, screen shots, new date and time formats, backdrops, timers, serial I/O, audio recording, substacks, template objects, labels as distinct from names, and dozens of new properties for even buttons and fields, just to name a few - all unique to Rev. And then there's a good number of tokens not in HC that Rev has adopted from other xTalks, like SC's frontScripts, backScripts, graphic objects, transfer modes, and the merge function, and OMO's libraryStack message, just to name a few, along with a new altID property to make such ports even easier. If it appears all Rev brings to the table is multi-platform support and its IDE, that perception will change as one spends more time with the Rev Dictionary. A LOT has been happening since the engine
RE: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
Gee, how would that confuse anyone? -Original Message- From: "Robert Brenstein" To: "How to use Revolution" Sent: 12/22/2008 4:59 PM Subject: Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions... On 22/12/08 at 09:05 -0800 Randall Lee Reetz apparently wrote: >If I go to amazon to purchase a programming system, I will ask for a >product by name. If I am comparing language families it would be >ridiculous to list Rev next to C. If I was to mention Rev, I would >have to then refer to CodeWarrior and such instead of C. > >xTalk is to C as Revolution is to CodeWarrior. Randall, I wonder whether you are not being confused by "Revolution" refering to two different things nowadays. Revolution is parallel to Codewarrior as the IDE. Revolution is parallel to C or SmallTalk as the language. The language of Revolution used to be called Transcript, but not that long ago, RunRev decided to rename the language to Revolution. Robert ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
Irgh, I got lost while reading this thread. Question, wasn't the language called transcript? xTalk is not a language is a set of common characteristics shared by HyperTalk, MetaTalk, SuperTalk and friends... if xTalk was a language then find me a xTalk interpreter, compiler. There's no such thing. xTalk was an idea to bring together all similar things and find a common ground, like they did with common lisp (Remember the joke about practical common lisp being as practical and common as the holy roman empire was holy and an empire...) and by the way, transcript or metatalk or revolution or whichever we call it today, is as turing complete as C, Lisp, Smalltalk and others, so please don't tell me that as a language it fails somewhere because it does not. Now if you want to talk about spread and commonness of Runtime Revolution product in comparison of other languages, then don't push the discussion towards language taxonomy or semantics/syntax because it does not make sense! You can complain about lack of widgets and libraries. You can complain about iPhone, Flash, Amiga, RISC PC, Toaster support (my pet peeve is BSD support) You can complain about it being so easy that film school graduates can code professional apps with no formal CS education You can complain about not being able to create your own Operating System with Revolution But you simply can't say that the scripting language (syntax + semantics) doesn't compare with C, APL, Whatever... because that simply ain't true. Yes we can code a full blown OS with C, we can revolutionize the world with SmallTalk, we can rover around mars with Lisp but it took me 2 months to create a full blown network preferences application in C/C++ for Haiku (BeOS like system), the same work would take a week maximum with Revolution (and this include building the C external for the I/O network card stuff). So how do we measure the success of a language? How do we compare them? The answer is simple: We Don't!!! To each their own, my uncle who's a naval engineer still using Fortran 77, some masochi^H^H^H^H^H^H coders still use PERL and will not trade it for anything. I am fond of Lisp and wish I they sold plush parentheses so I could put them on my office desk. The thing is, people use what they know and for them that is the best option. Saying that Revolution doesn't rank as well as $LANGUAGE$ doesn't mean anything. Ask Chipp, Trevor or Richard about deploying solutions in Rev instead of C... You might get the impression that C doesn't rank as well as Revolution, which would also be false, since both are turing complete and very competent at their own niche, Revolution being in the business empowering the developers with an sane language easy to learn and maintain and C being in the business of leaking memory^H^H^H^H low level stuff. all languages are fine... ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
Richard, I just don't think a language is significantly different because it has more or less words than it had at one time. What distinguishes a language from other languages is structural, grammatical, syntactic. Both spanish and english acquire new lexicon all the time... rarely does this new vocabulary require a rewrite of the grammatical rules that sit at each language's base. Nobody looking at Rev's script would ever say it wasn't an xtalk language. Adding a load of new words and functions doesn't change this, never will. None of what I am saying is an evaluation of Rev. The reason both SuperCard and Rev can make available hyperCard stack translators is because of this structural kinship. It is a badge of honor. Every time a new domain specific version of C comes out, i role my eyes and groan. You can't make a purse out of a sow's ear. Garbage in – garbage out. XTalk heritage is a selling point! Adding functionality on top... well that is even better. It matters what sits under and supports any new functionality. I am certainly not saying that xTalk is the end-all-be-all language. The future holds promise (I hope). What I am saying is that a flexible natural language syntax leverages human cognition and learned abilities... enabling a short learning curve and the ability to concentrate on problem domain instead of tool domain. Allan Kay and Bill Atkinson understood and honored this premise. I don't need to be sold on the positive attributes of Rev. The problems I have had with SuperCard have nothing to do with the product. I love supercard! And nothing at all to do with its development team (person). The organization is too small for decent product development funding. And, (from what I have been told) the product is owned by a group that does not own access to all of the kernel upon which it is built. Randall On Dec 22, 2008, at 10:41 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote: Randall Lee Reetz wrote: As I said, there are important aspects of the Revolution product that ARE unique... the use and GUI centered IDE, the multi- platform develop and publish flexibility, the viability of the user community and this online support group, the stability of the company and the rapidity and reliability of the pace of version development cycle, the constant evolution of the product in lockstep with platform evolution, etc. But the subject was the scripting language itself. While of course Revolution is just one implementation in the xTalk family of languages, its specific dialect at this point is probably 30% or even 40% or more unique, or at least distinct from the Mother Tongue, HyperTalk. If we exclude all externals (since they were written in other languages) and look only at what's natively in the engine, it might even be the case that Rev has added as many new tokens as were in the entire HyperTalk 2.x language. All tokens related to arrays, sockets, URLs, new forms of repeat, icons in ask and answer, scrollbars, color, blendlevels, images, groups, gradients, aliases, system color and folder pickers, compression/decompression, binary file I/O, binary operators, Unicode, window modes, mouseMove and other messages, buffer control, video playback, QTVR control, drag-and-drop, executionContexts and other debugging/logging info, script-local vars, animated GIFs, image export formats, screen shots, new date and time formats, backdrops, timers, serial I/O, audio recording, substacks, template objects, labels as distinct from names, and dozens of new properties for even buttons and fields, just to name a few - all unique to Rev. And then there's a good number of tokens not in HC that Rev has adopted from other xTalks, like SC's frontScripts, backScripts, graphic objects, transfer modes, and the merge function, and OMO's libraryStack message, just to name a few, along with a new altID property to make such ports even easier. If it appears all Rev brings to the table is multi-platform support and its IDE, that perception will change as one spends more time with the Rev Dictionary. A LOT has been happening since the engine was born in '92. I don't even use the Rev IDE nor its externals. With just the core language in the engine, I simply couldn't go back to HC or even SC if I had to. While we're all using xTalks, I've adopted a coding style that makes such extensive use of the expanded syntax and object model that I doubt much of what I do would run anywhere else. Sure, Rev feels familiar to any xTalker. I guess that's a good sign of how passionate Mark Waddingham is about maintaining the flavor of the language (he was once nearly willing to engage in fisticuffs with me in his defense of the language style ; I acquiesced, of course, since he's both younger and stronger than me and more importantly fighting with a greater sense of purpose). But
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
On 22/12/08 at 09:05 -0800 Randall Lee Reetz apparently wrote: If I go to amazon to purchase a programming system, I will ask for a product by name. If I am comparing language families it would be ridiculous to list Rev next to C. If I was to mention Rev, I would have to then refer to CodeWarrior and such instead of C. xTalk is to C as Revolution is to CodeWarrior. Randall, I wonder whether you are not being confused by "Revolution" refering to two different things nowadays. Revolution is parallel to Codewarrior as the IDE. Revolution is parallel to C or SmallTalk as the language. The language of Revolution used to be called Transcript, but not that long ago, RunRev decided to rename the language to Revolution. Robert ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
RE: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
Wow, i just think xtalk is a point of pride. This thead started with "what should we call it?" and morphed to an apologetic on how we should explain why we use it? And i argue that both ?s are solved when you honor its lineage. -Original Message- From: "Brian Yennie" To: "How to use Revolution" Sent: 12/22/2008 3:10 PM Subject: Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions... > This is not true. You can call Revolution by its name all day > long... in reference to the product. But if you are setting up a > comparison between major categories of languages, Rev's scripting > language certainly doesn't rank its own spot along side the likes of > C, Lisp, and SmallTalk. Well sure, IF we are talking about some sort of high level, arbitrary taxonomy then you are right. But I still don't know who besides you is trying to create one. I guess everyone who works in C++ should be very careful to put it under "C" and not mention it on its own. What's the point? OK, Revolution didn't invent xTalk syntax. We get it. Very few languages have their own unique syntax. > If I go to amazon to purchase a programming system, I will ask for a > product by name. If I am comparing language families it would be > ridiculous to list Rev next to C. If I was to mention Rev, I would > have to then refer to CodeWarrior and such instead of C. > > xTalk is to C as Revolution is to CodeWarrior. No, it's not. CodeWarrior is just a C IDE + compiler in this context. Revolution is NOT just an IDE for an already existing language. It's not a HyperTalk compiler. > My original post was not in direct relation to this silly religion > thread. The religion thread is a sub-thread to a larger discussion > about what to call the scripting language within the Revolution > product. > In this larger discussion, I saw a disturbing lack of historical and > genealogical reference to the origin of the language upon which Rev > is based. Again, there is much about Rev that is unique within the > xTalk development tool category... the scripting language itself is > not significantly unique to this same degree. In point of fact, it > is upon the strength of this borrowed (event driven, message > passing, object centered, english syntax) language that Rev is based. OK, that's fine in theory, even though the list of major improvements to the language is enormous. Yes, one could argue that the true power lives in the english-like syntax and message passing model. Perhaps it's just your choice of words which are condescending. You call the thread silly, say people are drinking "Kool-Aid", that things "disturb" you and that people are lacking respect for the origins of the language. C'mon. You obviously have no clue what group of people you are addressing, and call people names when they respectfully disagree with you. > That is how I describe Rev when I am asked. There are better and > worse IDEs in every language category. For many reasons, Rev is one > of the best in the xTalk category. But what really makes Rev great > is the same thing that makes SuperCard great... the friendly > underlying xTalk language and simple object hierarchy within which > it is situated. Not how I would put it, but surely a fair point of view. > In my opinion, the best way to brag up the Rev product is to call > out its strengths. Naming Rev's scripting language anything that > does not directly reference this key attribute (xTalk) would ignore > the goodwill inherent in the structure and heritage that was > intentionally designed into the original SmallTalk and HyperTalk > languages and the philosophy that drove those original design > decisions. > > As good as the Rev IDE is, if you wrapped it around C instead of > xTalk, you would be left with C... most of us would abandon the [truncated by sender] ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
This is not true. You can call Revolution by its name all day long... in reference to the product. But if you are setting up a comparison between major categories of languages, Rev's scripting language certainly doesn't rank its own spot along side the likes of C, Lisp, and SmallTalk. Well sure, IF we are talking about some sort of high level, arbitrary taxonomy then you are right. But I still don't know who besides you is trying to create one. I guess everyone who works in C++ should be very careful to put it under "C" and not mention it on its own. What's the point? OK, Revolution didn't invent xTalk syntax. We get it. Very few languages have their own unique syntax. If I go to amazon to purchase a programming system, I will ask for a product by name. If I am comparing language families it would be ridiculous to list Rev next to C. If I was to mention Rev, I would have to then refer to CodeWarrior and such instead of C. xTalk is to C as Revolution is to CodeWarrior. No, it's not. CodeWarrior is just a C IDE + compiler in this context. Revolution is NOT just an IDE for an already existing language. It's not a HyperTalk compiler. My original post was not in direct relation to this silly religion thread. The religion thread is a sub-thread to a larger discussion about what to call the scripting language within the Revolution product. In this larger discussion, I saw a disturbing lack of historical and genealogical reference to the origin of the language upon which Rev is based. Again, there is much about Rev that is unique within the xTalk development tool category... the scripting language itself is not significantly unique to this same degree. In point of fact, it is upon the strength of this borrowed (event driven, message passing, object centered, english syntax) language that Rev is based. OK, that's fine in theory, even though the list of major improvements to the language is enormous. Yes, one could argue that the true power lives in the english-like syntax and message passing model. Perhaps it's just your choice of words which are condescending. You call the thread silly, say people are drinking "Kool-Aid", that things "disturb" you and that people are lacking respect for the origins of the language. C'mon. You obviously have no clue what group of people you are addressing, and call people names when they respectfully disagree with you. That is how I describe Rev when I am asked. There are better and worse IDEs in every language category. For many reasons, Rev is one of the best in the xTalk category. But what really makes Rev great is the same thing that makes SuperCard great... the friendly underlying xTalk language and simple object hierarchy within which it is situated. Not how I would put it, but surely a fair point of view. In my opinion, the best way to brag up the Rev product is to call out its strengths. Naming Rev's scripting language anything that does not directly reference this key attribute (xTalk) would ignore the goodwill inherent in the structure and heritage that was intentionally designed into the original SmallTalk and HyperTalk languages and the philosophy that drove those original design decisions. As good as the Rev IDE is, if you wrapped it around C instead of xTalk, you would be left with C... most of us would abandon the product immediately. Know what I mean? Yes, I do =). We share a common appreciation for Rev. So I would suggest calling people out a little less when they simply disagree about how to classify it. I'm sure we could carry on this back and forth forever, so I will let it be at this point. At least we both like the product, whatever we call it. ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
Randall Lee Reetz wrote: As I said, there are important aspects of the Revolution product that ARE unique... the use and GUI centered IDE, the multi-platform develop and publish flexibility, the viability of the user community and this online support group, the stability of the company and the rapidity and reliability of the pace of version development cycle, the constant evolution of the product in lockstep with platform evolution, etc. But the subject was the scripting language itself. While of course Revolution is just one implementation in the xTalk family of languages, its specific dialect at this point is probably 30% or even 40% or more unique, or at least distinct from the Mother Tongue, HyperTalk. If we exclude all externals (since they were written in other languages) and look only at what's natively in the engine, it might even be the case that Rev has added as many new tokens as were in the entire HyperTalk 2.x language. All tokens related to arrays, sockets, URLs, new forms of repeat, icons in ask and answer, scrollbars, color, blendlevels, images, groups, gradients, aliases, system color and folder pickers, compression/decompression, binary file I/O, binary operators, Unicode, window modes, mouseMove and other messages, buffer control, video playback, QTVR control, drag-and-drop, executionContexts and other debugging/logging info, script-local vars, animated GIFs, image export formats, screen shots, new date and time formats, backdrops, timers, serial I/O, audio recording, substacks, template objects, labels as distinct from names, and dozens of new properties for even buttons and fields, just to name a few - all unique to Rev. And then there's a good number of tokens not in HC that Rev has adopted from other xTalks, like SC's frontScripts, backScripts, graphic objects, transfer modes, and the merge function, and OMO's libraryStack message, just to name a few, along with a new altID property to make such ports even easier. If it appears all Rev brings to the table is multi-platform support and its IDE, that perception will change as one spends more time with the Rev Dictionary. A LOT has been happening since the engine was born in '92. I don't even use the Rev IDE nor its externals. With just the core language in the engine, I simply couldn't go back to HC or even SC if I had to. While we're all using xTalks, I've adopted a coding style that makes such extensive use of the expanded syntax and object model that I doubt much of what I do would run anywhere else. Sure, Rev feels familiar to any xTalker. I guess that's a good sign of how passionate Mark Waddingham is about maintaining the flavor of the language (he was once nearly willing to engage in fisticuffs with me in his defense of the language style ; I acquiesced, of course, since he's both younger and stronger than me and more importantly fighting with a greater sense of purpose). But for all its familiarity, Rev is a brave new world among xTalks, one that has earned through the sweat of its many programmers a place of unique honor among the xTalk dialects. True, Mark Lucas, SuperCard's lead programmer, is perhaps the greatest Mac programmer I've ever been privileged to know personally, and under his stewardship it's no surprise SuperCard has done as well as it has. But while Mr. Lucas may do the work of a ten men, not only does he have a stronger loathing of the Windows API than even myself, but he would also be among the first to note the challenges of doing this sort of work for multiple platforms. Drag and drop, for example, is a complex API on OS X; add in Windows and Linux and the complexity grows geometrically. For all the inspiration Rev has drawn from its lineage, the Rev engine is quite an achievement in its own right. Browse through the Dictionary and you'll see what I mean. -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Revolution training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com Webzine for Rev developers: http://www.revjournal.com ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
RE: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
Exactly. -Original Message- From: "Richard Gaskin" To: "How to use Revolution" Sent: 12/22/2008 8:22 AM Subject: Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions... I'm not sure if it helps or hinders the conversation to note that, to the best of my knowledge, the term "xTalk" was coined by none other than Scott Raney, inventor of MetaCard. At the time, HyperTalkers preferred the term "HyperTalk", and SuperTalkers preferred "SuperTalk", but Dr. Raney showed the generosity to bring into common usage a term which encompasses them all. In the mid-90s he created the xTalk mailing list, a discusssion forum whose aim was to provide a venue for the various xTalk vendors to standardize syntax additions. This is not unlike the talks that had once been proposed by Charlie Jackson (Silicon Beach Software, publisher of SuperCard at the time) and Jean Louis Gassee (Apple VP of technology at the time) to standardize what were then called "HyperTalk dialects". With both the xTalk list and the earlier Silicon Beach talks, when it actually came time to start work Apple refused to participate. In fact, with the xTalk list pretty much every vendor refused to participate except Doug Simons of Thoughtful Software, inventor of SenseTalk, and Dr. Raney himself. All were sent invitations; only one showed up at the party. I think it speaks well of the audience for these tools that the word "xTalk" has caught on: it seems the users of these tools have a broader vision for what the future can be than their old vendors did; the users are still with us even when the vendor is not. -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Revolution training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com Webzine for Rev developers: http://www.revjournal.com ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
On Dec 21, 2008, at 10:07 PM, Brian Yennie wrote: There's nothing irresponsible about it, because you are the only one I see stirring up some sort of arbitrary taxonomic discussion. This thread started as a light-hearted discussion of an article comparing programming languages to religions. Someone dared call Revolution by its name, and you jumped in on an xTalk rant. This is not true. You can call Revolution by its name all day long... in reference to the product. But if you are setting up a comparison between major categories of languages, Rev's scripting language certainly doesn't rank its own spot along side the likes of C, Lisp, and SmallTalk. As I said, there are important aspects of the Revolution product that ARE unique... the use and GUI centered IDE, the multi-platform develop and publish flexibility, the viability of the user community and this online support group, the stability of the company and the rapidity and reliability of the pace of version development cycle, the constant evolution of the product in lockstep with platform evolution, etc. But the subject was the scripting language itself. If I go to amazon to purchase a programming system, I will ask for a product by name. If I am comparing language families it would be ridiculous to list Rev next to C. If I was to mention Rev, I would have to then refer to CodeWarrior and such instead of C. xTalk is to C as Revolution is to CodeWarrior. My original post was not in direct relation to this silly religion thread. The religion thread is a sub-thread to a larger discussion about what to call the scripting language within the Revolution product. In this larger discussion, I saw a disturbing lack of historical and genealogical reference to the origin of the language upon which Rev is based. Again, there is much about Rev that is unique within the xTalk development tool category... the scripting language itself is not significantly unique to this same degree. In point of fact, it is upon the strength of this borrowed (event driven, message passing, object centered, english syntax) language that Rev is based. That is how I describe Rev when I am asked. There are better and worse IDEs in every language category. For many reasons, Rev is one of the best in the xTalk category. But what really makes Rev great is the same thing that makes SuperCard great... the friendly underlying xTalk language and simple object hierarchy within which it is situated. In my opinion, the best way to brag up the Rev product is to call out its strengths. Naming Rev's scripting language anything that does not directly reference this key attribute (xTalk) would ignore the goodwill inherent in the structure and heritage that was intentionally designed into the original SmallTalk and HyperTalk languages and the philosophy that drove those original design decisions. As good as the Rev IDE is, if you wrapped it around C instead of xTalk, you would be left with C... most of us would abandon the product immediately. Know what I mean? Randall Randall ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
I'm not sure if it helps or hinders the conversation to note that, to the best of my knowledge, the term "xTalk" was coined by none other than Scott Raney, inventor of MetaCard. At the time, HyperTalkers preferred the term "HyperTalk", and SuperTalkers preferred "SuperTalk", but Dr. Raney showed the generosity to bring into common usage a term which encompasses them all. In the mid-90s he created the xTalk mailing list, a discusssion forum whose aim was to provide a venue for the various xTalk vendors to standardize syntax additions. This is not unlike the talks that had once been proposed by Charlie Jackson (Silicon Beach Software, publisher of SuperCard at the time) and Jean Louis Gassee (Apple VP of technology at the time) to standardize what were then called "HyperTalk dialects". With both the xTalk list and the earlier Silicon Beach talks, when it actually came time to start work Apple refused to participate. In fact, with the xTalk list pretty much every vendor refused to participate except Doug Simons of Thoughtful Software, inventor of SenseTalk, and Dr. Raney himself. All were sent invitations; only one showed up at the party. I think it speaks well of the audience for these tools that the word "xTalk" has caught on: it seems the users of these tools have a broader vision for what the future can be than their old vendors did; the users are still with us even when the vendor is not. -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Revolution training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com Webzine for Rev developers: http://www.revjournal.com ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
Brian, Good comments. I agree with them all. As a beta HC and SC user, I agree with the fact Rev has taken those beginning xTalk languages WAY beyond the original scripted solutions they provided. It seems quite a disservice to the Rev programming team to suggest otherwise. For someone who thinks "all if (sic) you have drank a bit too much of the rev coolaid." it's interesting see search and see how much he has asked of us 'coolaid' drinkers for help on this list. I would expect a xTalk (Hypercard) expert to not have anything else to learn from this bit of trivia we know as Revolution-- after all-- it's just xTalk. ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
When someone adds a new function or even library to a version of C, do people claim it isnt still C? No. So then by your logic, should we should call it HyperTalk? Because that was the name of Hypercard's scripting language, not "xTalk". The essence of xtalk is completly independent from lexical additions. OK, sure - Can you imagine what would happen if we called every language with C-style syntax "C"? I mean hey, PHP is just interpreted C with different libraries and funny looking "$" signs, right? A better question would be "how many changes would you have to make to an xtalk incarnation before you could legitimately clasify it as its own language (at the level of C or Lisp)? This whole discussion is in responces to posts that hung revTalk up at the taxonomic level with these other legitimately different languages. I find that irresponsible and false. That is all. There's nothing irresponsible about it, because you are the only one I see stirring up some sort of arbitrary taxonomic discussion. This thread started as a light-hearted discussion of an article comparing programming languages to religions. Someone dared call Revolution by its name, and you jumped in on an xTalk rant. By the way, and not that it matters... I hate C and java and lisp and dont even particularly like smalltalk... Which is my way of thanking the true gods of xtalk, allan and bill (and the other bill). If you want to thank the forefathers of xTalk that's fine... again no dissent here. But give a little credit to the current generation. There's been a bit of value added since HyperTalk and that takes work and smart people too. The whole thing doesn't just fall into place as "lexical additions" from the sky. I dont seek friends... I seek truth. It seems to me you just seek to be right, and condescending towards those who disagree. Most of us here enjoy being friends, and it's a big part of why this list is so helpful. Disagreement is fine but you might reconsider the need to hijack a thread and start calling out all of the "Kool-Aid" drinkers in the group. Bjornke's reply for one was crystal clear. You felt the need to "honor" it with an insulting reply. No friends and no truth there. ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
Ahhh, the age-old battle between 'splitters' and 'lumpers'. I guess we you adopt a (Linnean) taxonomic metaphor then... If you're a splitter then: xTalk is the genus (language group) and Revolution/Hypertalk/Supertalk are the species (languages) But if you're a lumper then: xTalk is the species (language) and Revolution/Hypertalk/Supertalk are the subspecies (language variants) Personally I couldn't care either way. Revolution is what it is. Terry... On 22/12/08 9:58 AM, "Randall Reetz" wrote: > When someone adds a new function or even library to a version of C, do people > claim it isnt still C? The essence of xtalk is completly independent from > lexical additions. A better question would be "how many changes would you > have to make to an xtalk incarnation before you could legitimately clasify it > as its own language (at the level of C or Lisp)? This whole discussion is in > responces to posts that hung revTalk up at the taxonomic level with these > other legitimately different languages. I find that irresponsible and false. > That is all. > > By the way, and not that it matters... I hate C and java and lisp and dont > even particularly like smalltalk... Which is my way of thanking the true gods > of xtalk, allan and bill (and the other bill). > > I dont seek friends... I seek truth. > > randall > > -Original Message----- > From: "Brian Yennie" > To: "How to use Revolution" > Sent: 12/21/2008 2:40 PM > Subject: Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions... > > Randall, > > I'm not sure where your angst is coming from. This list if full of > people (myself included) that have given every possible credit to > SmallTalk, Hypercard, Supercard, et al. Nobody disagrees that Rev is > most certainly an xTalk language. I'm afraid you have vastly > underestimated (and belittled) the experience of people around here. > There are plenty of us who know darn well every last bit of xTalk > history and are quite familiar with other languages, including the > almighty C. People here have done every imaginable thing from day 1 of > xTalk's existence. > > Calling out "awkward logic", "rhetoric" and "Coolaid" drinking won't > get you very far and I'm quite sure that disagreeing with you is not > tantamount to failing to grasp your clear argument. Shockingly, many > of us completely understand your points, completely grasp several > programming languages and all of the history of xTalk and yet still > would disagree with you. > > You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I for one need not > drink Kool-Aid to disagree with it. > > Finally, your claim that RunRev has not made any significant > improvements to xTalk doesn't hold much water with me. Just for > starters, try a "repeat for each" loop in Hypercard. Or arrays. Or > say, running everything on Windows and Linux. Or as pure CGI scripting > language. Or try writing native socket scripts. Or compare the > performance of the compiler. Or imageData. Or... the many other things > I could surely name given more than a moment's thought. > >> It hardly seems reasonable to honor your imposibly awkward logic >> with a reply, but who i ask suggested calling Rev's script "the >> xtalk" or for that matter, "the" anythhing? I dont think anyone is >> confused by my clear argument. Maybe your thinking is confused by >> rhetoric within you. Coolaid. We all make wway too much of it >> right inside our own heads. > > > > ___ > use-revolution mailing list > use-revolution@lists.runrev.com > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription > preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution > > > ___ > use-revolution mailing list > use-revolution@lists.runrev.com > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription > preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution -- Dr Terry Judd Lecturer in Educational Technology (Design) Biomedical Multimedia Unit Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry & Health Sciences The University of Melbourne Parkville VIC 3052 AUSTRALIA 61-3 8344 0187 ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
RE: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
When someone adds a new function or even library to a version of C, do people claim it isnt still C? The essence of xtalk is completly independent from lexical additions. A better question would be "how many changes would you have to make to an xtalk incarnation before you could legitimately clasify it as its own language (at the level of C or Lisp)? This whole discussion is in responces to posts that hung revTalk up at the taxonomic level with these other legitimately different languages. I find that irresponsible and false. That is all. By the way, and not that it matters... I hate C and java and lisp and dont even particularly like smalltalk... Which is my way of thanking the true gods of xtalk, allan and bill (and the other bill). I dont seek friends... I seek truth. randall -Original Message- From: "Brian Yennie" To: "How to use Revolution" Sent: 12/21/2008 2:40 PM Subject: Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions... Randall, I'm not sure where your angst is coming from. This list if full of people (myself included) that have given every possible credit to SmallTalk, Hypercard, Supercard, et al. Nobody disagrees that Rev is most certainly an xTalk language. I'm afraid you have vastly underestimated (and belittled) the experience of people around here. There are plenty of us who know darn well every last bit of xTalk history and are quite familiar with other languages, including the almighty C. People here have done every imaginable thing from day 1 of xTalk's existence. Calling out "awkward logic", "rhetoric" and "Coolaid" drinking won't get you very far and I'm quite sure that disagreeing with you is not tantamount to failing to grasp your clear argument. Shockingly, many of us completely understand your points, completely grasp several programming languages and all of the history of xTalk and yet still would disagree with you. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I for one need not drink Kool-Aid to disagree with it. Finally, your claim that RunRev has not made any significant improvements to xTalk doesn't hold much water with me. Just for starters, try a "repeat for each" loop in Hypercard. Or arrays. Or say, running everything on Windows and Linux. Or as pure CGI scripting language. Or try writing native socket scripts. Or compare the performance of the compiler. Or imageData. Or... the many other things I could surely name given more than a moment's thought. > It hardly seems reasonable to honor your imposibly awkward logic > with a reply, but who i ask suggested calling Rev's script "the > xtalk" or for that matter, "the" anythhing? I dont think anyone is > confused by my clear argument. Maybe your thinking is confused by > rhetoric within you. Coolaid. We all make wway too much of it > right inside our own heads. ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
Randall, I'm not sure where your angst is coming from. This list if full of people (myself included) that have given every possible credit to SmallTalk, Hypercard, Supercard, et al. Nobody disagrees that Rev is most certainly an xTalk language. I'm afraid you have vastly underestimated (and belittled) the experience of people around here. There are plenty of us who know darn well every last bit of xTalk history and are quite familiar with other languages, including the almighty C. People here have done every imaginable thing from day 1 of xTalk's existence. Calling out "awkward logic", "rhetoric" and "Coolaid" drinking won't get you very far and I'm quite sure that disagreeing with you is not tantamount to failing to grasp your clear argument. Shockingly, many of us completely understand your points, completely grasp several programming languages and all of the history of xTalk and yet still would disagree with you. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I for one need not drink Kool-Aid to disagree with it. Finally, your claim that RunRev has not made any significant improvements to xTalk doesn't hold much water with me. Just for starters, try a "repeat for each" loop in Hypercard. Or arrays. Or say, running everything on Windows and Linux. Or as pure CGI scripting language. Or try writing native socket scripts. Or compare the performance of the compiler. Or imageData. Or... the many other things I could surely name given more than a moment's thought. It hardly seems reasonable to honor your imposibly awkward logic with a reply, but who i ask suggested calling Rev's script "the xtalk" or for that matter, "the" anythhing? I dont think anyone is confused by my clear argument. Maybe your thinking is confused by rhetoric within you. Coolaid. We all make wway too much of it right inside our own heads. ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
RE: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
It hardly seems reasonable to honor your imposibly awkward logic with a reply, but who i ask suggested calling Rev's script "the xtalk" or for that matter, "the" anythhing? I dont think anyone is confused by my clear argument. Maybe your thinking is confused by rhetoric within you. Coolaid. We all make wway too much of it right inside our own heads. -Original Message- From: "Björnke von Gierke" To: "How to use Revolution" Sent: 12/21/2008 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions... Dear Randall Uhm... I think there's a huge misunderstanding, therefore I'll rephrase my statement: Revolution (the language) is not "the xTalk", similar how "apple" is not "the fruits". Sure, Rev is one of many languages that can be called xTalk, and apples themselves are one of many fruit kinds that do exist. Yet, I won't claim that all fruits are apples, and therefore I am against your suggestion to call Revolution (the language) "the xTalk" from now on. I'm also pretty sure I did not imply that RunRev (company) invented everything that could be called xTalk. I do think that calling the Revolution language "the xTalk" would actually make people assume just that. Finally, I won't further participate in this... "discussion" with you in any way, despite being sure that you have much more to say on the topic. Björnke On 21 Dec 2008, at 18:32, Randall Reetz wrote: > A little respect to bill atkinson at apple (hypercard's inventor) > and allan kay before him (the xerox parc inventor of smalltalk). > Please. > > -Original Message- > From: "Randall Reetz" > To: "How to use Revolution" > Sent: 12/21/2008 9:19 AM > Subject: RE: [OT] If programming languages were religions... > > There are three aspects that determine the fit of a development > system. The first is final execution environment. Rev is agnostic > to all three major platforms. But rev is kind of limited within > internet facing browsers. The second is development environment. > Rev's IDE is object centered as though it was an interface mockup > tool. The IDE has been localized for each of the three big > platforms. As with all xtalk tools, rev is a object centered > message passing language in which events generate messages that are > sent down an object stacking hierarchy until they find an object > which has script that has a handler that matches. The handler is a > subroutine written n the xtalk lexicon and syntax. And this > scripting language, the third aspect of a development system, is > identical to all xtalk languages (except that it has a larger > function library than most). > > Rev can brag about its IDE and its cross platform development and > delivery flexibility... But it had better admit that its language is > xtalk and that rev neither invented it or significantly improved it. > > > -Original Message- > From: "Björnke von Gierke" > To: "How to use Revolution" [truncated by sender] ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
Dear Randall Uhm... I think there's a huge misunderstanding, therefore I'll rephrase my statement: Revolution (the language) is not "the xTalk", similar how "apple" is not "the fruits". Sure, Rev is one of many languages that can be called xTalk, and apples themselves are one of many fruit kinds that do exist. Yet, I won't claim that all fruits are apples, and therefore I am against your suggestion to call Revolution (the language) "the xTalk" from now on. I'm also pretty sure I did not imply that RunRev (company) invented everything that could be called xTalk. I do think that calling the Revolution language "the xTalk" would actually make people assume just that. Finally, I won't further participate in this... "discussion" with you in any way, despite being sure that you have much more to say on the topic. Björnke On 21 Dec 2008, at 18:32, Randall Reetz wrote: A little respect to bill atkinson at apple (hypercard's inventor) and allan kay before him (the xerox parc inventor of smalltalk). Please. -Original Message----- From: "Randall Reetz" To: "How to use Revolution" Sent: 12/21/2008 9:19 AM Subject: RE: [OT] If programming languages were religions... There are three aspects that determine the fit of a development system. The first is final execution environment. Rev is agnostic to all three major platforms. But rev is kind of limited within internet facing browsers. The second is development environment. Rev's IDE is object centered as though it was an interface mockup tool. The IDE has been localized for each of the three big platforms. As with all xtalk tools, rev is a object centered message passing language in which events generate messages that are sent down an object stacking hierarchy until they find an object which has script that has a handler that matches. The handler is a subroutine written n the xtalk lexicon and syntax. And this scripting language, the third aspect of a development system, is identical to all xtalk languages (except that it has a larger function library than most). Rev can brag about its IDE and its cross platform development and delivery flexibility... But it had better admit that its language is xtalk and that rev neither invented it or significantly improved it. -----Original Message- From: "Björnke von Gierke" To: "How to use Revolution" Sent: 12/20/2008 4:47 AM Subject: Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions... On 20 Dec 2008, at 04:41, Randall Reetz wrote: I wish people would use the term xtalk when refering to this language its structure and lexicon both come intact from hypercard and smalltalk before that. Revenue is a great integration synthesis of xtalk and a cross platform runtime engines, but the language is xtalk all the way in. Seems only fair. No? No. Time for car analogies (N!!!): If someone comes to the car salesman, and says "I'd want to buy a Lexus". Would you argue he'd be better off to say "I'd want to buy any car"? Xtalk is a loose description of types of languages, which includes hypercard as well as Rev. Of course the analogy will break down quickly if you ask 10 xtalk followers whether applescript is an xtalk language or not. Describing stuff is always hard, especially with the name trinity of RunRev marketing, but using xtalk for just one language will probably garner you some internet hate :) Have Fun Björnke -- official ChatRev page: http://bjoernke.com/runrev/chatrev.php Chat with other RunRev developers: go stack URL "http://bjoernke.com/stacks/chatrev/chatrev1.3b3.rev"; ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution [truncated by sender] ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
RE: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
A little respect to bill atkinson at apple (hypercard's inventor) and allan kay before him (the xerox parc inventor of smalltalk). Please. -Original Message- From: "Randall Reetz" To: "How to use Revolution" Sent: 12/21/2008 9:19 AM Subject: RE: [OT] If programming languages were religions... There are three aspects that determine the fit of a development system. The first is final execution environment. Rev is agnostic to all three major platforms. But rev is kind of limited within internet facing browsers. The second is development environment. Rev's IDE is object centered as though it was an interface mockup tool. The IDE has been localized for each of the three big platforms. As with all xtalk tools, rev is a object centered message passing language in which events generate messages that are sent down an object stacking hierarchy until they find an object which has script that has a handler that matches. The handler is a subroutine written n the xtalk lexicon and syntax. And this scripting language, the third aspect of a development system, is identical to all xtalk languages (except that it has a larger function library than most). Rev can brag about its IDE and its cross platform development and delivery flexibility... But it had better admit that its language is xtalk and that rev neither invented it or significantly improved it. -Original Message- From: "Björnke von Gierke" To: "How to use Revolution" Sent: 12/20/2008 4:47 AM Subject: Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions... On 20 Dec 2008, at 04:41, Randall Reetz wrote: > I wish people would use the term xtalk when refering to this > language its structure and lexicon both come intact from hypercard > and smalltalk before that. Revenue is a great integration synthesis > of xtalk and a cross platform runtime engines, but the language is > xtalk all the way in. Seems only fair. No? No. Time for car analogies (N!!!): If someone comes to the car salesman, and says "I'd want to buy a Lexus". Would you argue he'd be better off to say "I'd want to buy any car"? Xtalk is a loose description of types of languages, which includes hypercard as well as Rev. Of course the analogy will break down quickly if you ask 10 xtalk followers whether applescript is an xtalk language or not. Describing stuff is always hard, especially with the name trinity of RunRev marketing, but using xtalk for just one language will probably garner you some internet hate :) Have Fun Björnke -- official ChatRev page: http://bjoernke.com/runrev/chatrev.php Chat with other RunRev developers: go stack URL "http://bjoernke.com/stacks/chatrev/chatrev1.3b3.rev"; ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution [truncated by sender] ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
RE: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
There are three aspects that determine the fit of a development system. The first is final execution environment. Rev is agnostic to all three major platforms. But rev is kind of limited within internet facing browsers. The second is development environment. Rev's IDE is object centered as though it was an interface mockup tool. The IDE has been localized for each of the three big platforms. As with all xtalk tools, rev is a object centered message passing language in which events generate messages that are sent down an object stacking hierarchy until they find an object which has script that has a handler that matches. The handler is a subroutine written n the xtalk lexicon and syntax. And this scripting language, the third aspect of a development system, is identical to all xtalk languages (except that it has a larger function library than most). Rev can brag about its IDE and its cross platform development and delivery flexibility... But it had better admit that its language is xtalk and that rev neither invented it or significantly improved it. -Original Message- From: "Björnke von Gierke" To: "How to use Revolution" Sent: 12/20/2008 4:47 AM Subject: Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions... On 20 Dec 2008, at 04:41, Randall Reetz wrote: > I wish people would use the term xtalk when refering to this > language its structure and lexicon both come intact from hypercard > and smalltalk before that. Revenue is a great integration synthesis > of xtalk and a cross platform runtime engines, but the language is > xtalk all the way in. Seems only fair. No? No. Time for car analogies (N!!!): If someone comes to the car salesman, and says "I'd want to buy a Lexus". Would you argue he'd be better off to say "I'd want to buy any car"? Xtalk is a loose description of types of languages, which includes hypercard as well as Rev. Of course the analogy will break down quickly if you ask 10 xtalk followers whether applescript is an xtalk language or not. Describing stuff is always hard, especially with the name trinity of RunRev marketing, but using xtalk for just one language will probably garner you some internet hate :) Have Fun Björnke -- official ChatRev page: http://bjoernke.com/runrev/chatrev.php Chat with other RunRev developers: go stack URL "http://bjoernke.com/stacks/chatrev/chatrev1.3b3.rev"; ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
If we're doing taxonomy of programming languages, then I'd say that Revolution is to xTalk as C is to Algol. (if we're talking about popularity, there's no comparison). I also think the religious metaphor is a good joke that seems to have been stretched beyond it's breaking point... Best, Mark On 21 Dec 2008, at 02:57, Randall Reetz wrote: I think all if you have drank a bit too much of the rev coolaid. This dicussion was about Languages with a capital "L". Comparing rev on the same level with C is like comparing Islam with sarah palin's local prayer house. Lets be reasonable please. -Original Message- From: "Björnke von Gierke" To: "How to use Revolution" Sent: 12/20/2008 4:47 AM Subject: Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions... On 20 Dec 2008, at 04:41, Randall Reetz wrote: I wish people would use the term xtalk when refering to this language its structure and lexicon both come intact from hypercard and smalltalk before that. Revenue is a great integration synthesis of xtalk and a cross platform runtime engines, but the language is xtalk all the way in. Seems only fair. No? No. Time for car analogies (N!!!): If someone comes to the car salesman, and says "I'd want to buy a Lexus". Would you argue he'd be better off to say "I'd want to buy any car"? Xtalk is a loose description of types of languages, which includes hypercard as well as Rev. Of course the analogy will break down quickly if you ask 10 xtalk followers whether applescript is an xtalk language or not. Describing stuff is always hard, especially with the name trinity of RunRev marketing, but using xtalk for just one language will probably garner you some internet hate :) Have Fun Björnke -- official ChatRev page: http://bjoernke.com/runrev/chatrev.php Chat with other RunRev developers: go stack URL "http://bjoernke.com/stacks/chatrev/chatrev1.3b3.rev"; ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
RE: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
I think all if you have drank a bit too much of the rev coolaid. This dicussion was about Languages with a capital "L". Comparing rev on the same level with C is like comparing Islam with sarah palin's local prayer house. Lets be reasonable please. -Original Message- From: "Björnke von Gierke" To: "How to use Revolution" Sent: 12/20/2008 4:47 AM Subject: Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions... On 20 Dec 2008, at 04:41, Randall Reetz wrote: > I wish people would use the term xtalk when refering to this > language its structure and lexicon both come intact from hypercard > and smalltalk before that. Revenue is a great integration synthesis > of xtalk and a cross platform runtime engines, but the language is > xtalk all the way in. Seems only fair. No? No. Time for car analogies (N!!!): If someone comes to the car salesman, and says "I'd want to buy a Lexus". Would you argue he'd be better off to say "I'd want to buy any car"? Xtalk is a loose description of types of languages, which includes hypercard as well as Rev. Of course the analogy will break down quickly if you ask 10 xtalk followers whether applescript is an xtalk language or not. Describing stuff is always hard, especially with the name trinity of RunRev marketing, but using xtalk for just one language will probably garner you some internet hate :) Have Fun Björnke -- official ChatRev page: http://bjoernke.com/runrev/chatrev.php Chat with other RunRev developers: go stack URL "http://bjoernke.com/stacks/chatrev/chatrev1.3b3.rev"; ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
Ok, this seems reasonable. Still I really liked the Hinduism metaphor. It is a classic. Thanks Tom McGrath III Lazy River Software 3mcgr...@comcast.net iTunes Library Suite - libITS Information and download can be found on this page: http://www.lazyriversoftware.com/RevOne.html On Dec 20, 2008, at 11:44 AM, Richmond Mathewson wrote: Therefore, I believe that the metaphor of Runtime Revolution as a sort of Hinduism holds up reasonably well, while an equivalent metaphor of Runtime Revolution as a sort of Christianity would not. sincerely, Richmond Mathewson. ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
This is the best Richmond post ever! I see Runtime Revolution as, in some way, resembling Hinduism: sincerely, Richmond Mathewson. -- stephen barncard s a n f r a n c i s c o - - - - - - - - - - - - ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
OK, I'll bite. What is your Christian metaphor? Tom McGrath III Lazy River Software 3mcgr...@comcast.net iTunes Library Suite - libITS Information and download can be found on this page: http://www.lazyriversoftware.com/RevOne.html On Dec 20, 2008, at 5:43 AM, Richmond Mathewson wrote: PS. And if you think that is bad ask for my metaphor using Christianity! ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
On 20 Dec 2008, at 04:41, Randall Reetz wrote: I wish people would use the term xtalk when refering to this language its structure and lexicon both come intact from hypercard and smalltalk before that. Revenue is a great integration synthesis of xtalk and a cross platform runtime engines, but the language is xtalk all the way in. Seems only fair. No? No. Time for car analogies (N!!!): If someone comes to the car salesman, and says "I'd want to buy a Lexus". Would you argue he'd be better off to say "I'd want to buy any car"? Xtalk is a loose description of types of languages, which includes hypercard as well as Rev. Of course the analogy will break down quickly if you ask 10 xtalk followers whether applescript is an xtalk language or not. Describing stuff is always hard, especially with the name trinity of RunRev marketing, but using xtalk for just one language will probably garner you some internet hate :) Have Fun Björnke -- official ChatRev page: http://bjoernke.com/runrev/chatrev.php Chat with other RunRev developers: go stack URL "http://bjoernke.com/stacks/chatrev/chatrev1.3b3.rev"; ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
RE: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
Sorry, my phone is a random freudian generator. I meant revolution not revenue. -Original Message- From: "Randall Reetz" To: "How to use Revolution" Sent: 12/19/2008 7:41 PM Subject: RE: [OT] If programming languages were religions... I wish people would use the term xtalk when refering to this language its structure and lexicon both come intact from hypercard and smalltalk before that. Revenue is a great integration synthesis of xtalk and a cross platform runtime engines, but the language is xtalk all the way in. Seems only fair. No? -Original Message- From: "viktoras didziulis" To: "How to use Revolution" Sent: 12/19/2008 1:47 PM Subject: Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions... h Revolution is like Jehovah Witnesses. Made up of a relatively small albeit stable and friendly community of followers and controlled by a small company Revolution somehow resists the power of mainstream beliefs with large evil corporations behind. Although well known for its pacifistic attitudes, it cherishes a hope since the very establishment that this evil World is moving to the end, and the Revolution is going to dominate the New World soon. Believing the God's name has to be written and pronounced using rules of the English language, its followers read and interpret the Scripts literally. However this might have raised some doubts about the trustworthiness of the word about Revolution because of experiences caused by diverse national, linguistic and religious identities. The partisans of Revolution strongly believe that many dogmas and assumptions of mainstream religions are incorrect interpretations, bad habits and even superstitions. Meanwhile adherents of the mainstream religions usually look at revolutionists "from above". However the later tend to became converted after just a few days of "hands on" experience with Revolution. --- sorry, I could not resist to write one more, as it was also missing from the original list of languages :-) --- Assembly - the language in which the Universe has been created. Mastered only by the God himself. Currently known and used by ascended beings or inspired humans, and unfortunately, also demons and dark mags. While the former can do miracles with it, the dark side adherents use their knowledge to corrupt the World. sincerely your slightly inspired cafeteria christian permanently corrupted by voodoo practices Viktoras Hugh Senior wrote: > I would quote this in full, but it's better on the webPage... > > http://www.aegisub.net/2008/12/if-programming-languages-were-religions.html > > We now need one for Rev. > > /H > ___ > use-revolution mailing list > use-revolution@lists.runrev.com > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription > preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution > > ___ [truncated by sender] ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
RE: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
I wish people would use the term xtalk when refering to this language its structure and lexicon both come intact from hypercard and smalltalk before that. Revenue is a great integration synthesis of xtalk and a cross platform runtime engines, but the language is xtalk all the way in. Seems only fair. No? -Original Message- From: "viktoras didziulis" To: "How to use Revolution" Sent: 12/19/2008 1:47 PM Subject: Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions... h Revolution is like Jehovah Witnesses. Made up of a relatively small albeit stable and friendly community of followers and controlled by a small company Revolution somehow resists the power of mainstream beliefs with large evil corporations behind. Although well known for its pacifistic attitudes, it cherishes a hope since the very establishment that this evil World is moving to the end, and the Revolution is going to dominate the New World soon. Believing the God's name has to be written and pronounced using rules of the English language, its followers read and interpret the Scripts literally. However this might have raised some doubts about the trustworthiness of the word about Revolution because of experiences caused by diverse national, linguistic and religious identities. The partisans of Revolution strongly believe that many dogmas and assumptions of mainstream religions are incorrect interpretations, bad habits and even superstitions. Meanwhile adherents of the mainstream religions usually look at revolutionists "from above". However the later tend to became converted after just a few days of "hands on" experience with Revolution. --- sorry, I could not resist to write one more, as it was also missing from the original list of languages :-) --- Assembly - the language in which the Universe has been created. Mastered only by the God himself. Currently known and used by ascended beings or inspired humans, and unfortunately, also demons and dark mags. While the former can do miracles with it, the dark side adherents use their knowledge to corrupt the World. sincerely your slightly inspired cafeteria christian permanently corrupted by voodoo practices Viktoras Hugh Senior wrote: > I would quote this in full, but it's better on the webPage... > > http://www.aegisub.net/2008/12/if-programming-languages-were-religions.html > > We now need one for Rev. > > /H > ___ > use-revolution mailing list > use-revolution@lists.runrev.com > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription > preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution > > ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
On 19 Dec 2008, at 16:51, Bob Hartley wrote: *LOLCODE* would be *Pastafarianism* Pastafarianism is an internet meme/joke/pun related to Creationism. Check out the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster: http://www.venganza.org/ LOLcode is also an internet joke, basically the attempt at making a programming language out of Lolspeak, which is in turn another internet joke. Interestingly, in my eyes LOLcode is the closest to rev in that list, at least semantic wise... Check out the examples: http://lolcode.com Lolspeak examples: http://icanhascheezburger.com/ I know way too much about these things... Björnke -- official ChatRev page: http://bjoernke.com/runrev/chatrev.php Chat with other RunRev developers: go stack URL "http://bjoernke.com/stacks/chatrev/chatrev1.3b3.rev"; ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
h Revolution is like Jehovah Witnesses. Made up of a relatively small albeit stable and friendly community of followers and controlled by a small company Revolution somehow resists the power of mainstream beliefs with large evil corporations behind. Although well known for its pacifistic attitudes, it cherishes a hope since the very establishment that this evil World is moving to the end, and the Revolution is going to dominate the New World soon. Believing the God's name has to be written and pronounced using rules of the English language, its followers read and interpret the Scripts literally. However this might have raised some doubts about the trustworthiness of the word about Revolution because of experiences caused by diverse national, linguistic and religious identities. The partisans of Revolution strongly believe that many dogmas and assumptions of mainstream religions are incorrect interpretations, bad habits and even superstitions. Meanwhile adherents of the mainstream religions usually look at revolutionists "from above". However the later tend to became converted after just a few days of "hands on" experience with Revolution. --- sorry, I could not resist to write one more, as it was also missing from the original list of languages :-) --- Assembly - the language in which the Universe has been created. Mastered only by the God himself. Currently known and used by ascended beings or inspired humans, and unfortunately, also demons and dark mags. While the former can do miracles with it, the dark side adherents use their knowledge to corrupt the World. sincerely your slightly inspired cafeteria christian permanently corrupted by voodoo practices Viktoras Hugh Senior wrote: I would quote this in full, but it's better on the webPage... http://www.aegisub.net/2008/12/if-programming-languages-were-religions.html We now need one for Rev. /H ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
I think Hypertalk/Xtalk would fall under Unitarian i really LOLed at the last Visual Basic would be Satanism - Except that you don't REALLY need to sell your soul to be a Satanist... looking at possibility of trying to convert some old cdroms done by others in vb to rev and its easier to just look at functionality and cut and paste assets than even try to start pulling code and access db apart! Now i know why i whipped out mac hc versions of our products in one third of the time that the pc guys took with vb based versions. also mac got a tenth the bug reports -- even though the mac version was the first and one all asset testing happened in as well... cheers, jeff ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
Hugh- Friday, December 19, 2008, 7:43:26 AM, you wrote: > We now need one for Rev. ...the Python description seems like a good fit... ...and when I'm fighting with it, the Perl description as well -- -Mark Wieder mwie...@ahsoftware.net ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
Hi Hugh, I would quote this in full, but it's better on the webPage... http://www.aegisub.net/2008/12/if-programming-languages-were-religions.html I really didn't know that Humanism is a religion?! :-D We now need one for Rev. /H Best Klaus Major kl...@major-k.de http://www.major-k.de ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...
Hugh Senior wrote: I would quote this in full, but it's better on the webPage... http://www.aegisub.net/2008/12/if-programming-languages-were-religions.html To quote *"LOLCODE* would be *Pastafarianism*" Is that only for Italians with dreadlocks. :-) Maybee that is why it is called "LOL" code :-) 1hr10 mins to go before I'm off for my christmas break until Jan the 5th. :-) Cheers Bob We now need one for Rev. /H ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
