Is Transcript's English orientation a plus or minus?

[Chipp Walters]

Frank,

If you want dot notation and equals signs, why wouldn't you just use C, or
VB or Java or any ohter authoring language which has those? That's what
*they do*. At some point, adding same syntax ends up creating same
functionality.

The fact is that the X-talks *are not like those other languages*. That's
what many of us actually like about Transcript.

When I switched to RR from VB a couple of years ago, I had a few script
errors like:

x=2 instead of put 2 into x

but, sooner than later...I ended up figuring it out. I expect others do too.

Anytime a person takes on a new language, be it Transcript, LISP, Perl, PHP,
SQL, ASP, VB, C, C++, C#, Java (on an on) they end up 'learning a new
language.' It's now a requisite for modern developers to be facile in their
ability to learn new languages.

RR has limited resources for modifying all of the many compiles of engines
it supports. My vote is they concentrate on adding features and fixing bugs,
rather than supporting multiple syntaxes.

best,

Chipp