On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 6:19 PM, Monte Goulding <mo...@sweattechnologies.com > wrote:
> > On 25 Oct 2015, at 9:05 am, Geoff Canyon <gcan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > The beauty of open language (in my dreams, perhaps not the spec) would be > > that: > > > > 1. No one would have to dig into the engine to implement something like > > this. > > 2. You could release your "counter" version, I could release my "index" > > version, and the community would decide which they prefer and go with > that. > > (or both). > > 3. And neither 1 nor 2 precludes something like this achieving critical > > mass such that the engine maintainers decide to put it in the engine > > directly. > > OK, well we can let Mark Waddingham comment on whether I’m right in that > control structures are unlikely targets for open language or not. It seems > quite unlikely to me as it’s significantly more complicated than commands. > I’m not saying it’s not possible the ROI would be terrible. As in almost 0 > return for a reasonably heavy investment… You might be right that control structures aren't included in the spec. I disagree that the ROI would be terrible, not because I think it would be easy to implement, but because I think the reward could be so great. The fundamentals of xTalk haven't grown much in a long time, and I hope to see that change. I understand that others might disagree. gc _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
