4 ms·
Second that! Like many (almost all?) others, I find AppleScript the language really painful to use. As I recall HyperTalk was similarly laden with unnecessary
by kkylin 10y ago
Second that! Like many (almost all?) others, I find AppleScript the language really painful to use. As I recall HyperTalk was similarly laden with unnecessary syntactic sugar, but the HyperCard environment was so much fun to use that I really did not mind the language.
- watersb 10y agoI really enjoyed working in HyperCard, HyperTalk 2.0 -- but never felt that way about AppleScript. I don't know why, exactly. Perhaps it was that HyperCard defined a domain. Applying the same primitives to every app could get clumsy. A hand-waving example: making every useful procedure a function hanging off of a single Window object. Except for the two functions that are actually in the Application object... (I don't have specific example at the moment but this sort of thing was discouraging for me.)
- kkylin 10y agoI think what was fun about HyperCard was that it was not purely textual -- a lot of the work (and fun) in building a stack was graphical. AppleScript seems more like a traditional programming language, but with syntax I have a hard time remembering (only use it very occasionally) and a lot of extra typing.