Transcript and/or ECMA

[opus.species at wanadoo.fr]

From: Pierre Sahores <psahores at easynet.fr>

> Agreed ! The English-like syntax of Transcript seem me to be one of the 
> main parts of the XTalk paradigm : As long as Rev will support this VHLL 
> feature, we will stay able to code transcript handlers, even without 
> running computers : i like to feel me free to "think and code" cool 
> handlers in the railroad or, even, in driving my car from home to the 
> office... I can't, for my own, do, with the same success, such kind of 
> things in using Rebol, PHP, Javascript or Java...
>  Bien cordialement, Pierre Sahores

I fully agree that for trained xtalk writers the english-like syntax of 
Transcript is an advantage.

As and old HyperCarder, Transcript is very fine for me too.

But if Revolution want to access to a biggest market share, you must 
consider that 98% of people trained to programming are trained to "ECMA" 
style langages.

Macromedia understood that and the next version of Director will support 
both the Lingo syntax (very xTalk like) and the ECMA (= 
javascript/actionscript)syntax.
Note the fact that ECMA syntax is not a proprietary syntax ; it is an open 
standard maintained by the European Computer Manufacturer Association.

If Revolution can speak the same langage as JavaScript, Flash (and 
tomorrow Director) that can help thousands of programmer to test it and to 
adopt it.

Claude
-- 
Utilisant M2, le client e-mail révolutionnaire d'Opera : 
http://www.opera.com/