On May 13, 2011, at 7:11 PM, Steve Steiner wrote:
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Steve King
<sking@arbor.net> wrote:
On 2011-05-13 13:00, Mario "Kuroir" Ricalde wrote:
I'm still locked with Textmate because I developed lots and lots of bundles and commands that save my day with the Ruby API TM provides. And as far as I know, ST just supports Python for doing that. Which to me is a deal breaker.
That's not an opinion, it's a fact. BrainF*ck is probably worse, but at least it only has a few understandable rules.
AppleScript is just random.
Worst. Language. Ever.
AppleScript has the singular virtue of being easier to read than to write. John Gruber (of
daringfireball.net) had a great post several years back on this topic in a post titled "The English-Likeness Monster".
Key quote:
"This is AppleScript at its worst. It was a grand and noble idea to create an English-like programming language, one that would seem approachable and unintimidating to the common user. But in this regard, AppleScript has proven to be a miserable and utter failure."
Apple actually did some user testing of AppleScript (!), but it came too late in the implementation to have a real impact of the language. This was mentioned in:
William R. Cook. 2007. AppleScript. In Proceedings of the third ACM SIGPLAN conference on History of programming languages (HOPL III). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1-1-1-21. DOI=10.1145/1238844.1238845
http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1238844.1238845
Lorin