EGNILGES@pucc.Princeton.EDU (Ed Nilges) (10/11/90)
I have two related questions as to (gack! neep!) Hypertalk considered
as a (geeble!) programming language.
1. How's the standardization effort?
2. Does anybody have a Backus-Naur and/or yacc definition of
the language that they can share with me.jk3t+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jonathan King) (10/11/90)
EGNILGES@pucc.Princeton.EDU (Ed Nilges) writes: > I have two related questions as to (gack! neep!) Hypertalk considered > as a (geeble!) programming language. (Geeble!) wins the prize for weirdest adjective of the week. > 1. How's the standardization effort? Standardization? For an embedded language appearing on a single platform? > 2. Does anybody have a Backus-Naur and/or yacc definition of > the language that they can share with me. For this (and many other fascinating details) you should run out and get the new HyperTalk book by Winkler and Kamins (published by Bantam). My copy isn't handy right at this moment, so I can't give you the ISBN. jking
dlugose@uncecs.edu (Dan Dlugose) (10/11/90)
In article <11858@pucc.Princeton.EDU> EGNILGES@pucc.Princeton.EDU writes: >I have two related questions as to (gack! neep!) Hypertalk considered >as a (geeble!) programming language. > > 1. How's the standardization effort? > > 2. Does anybody have a Backus-Naur and/or yacc definition of > the language that they can share with me. Appendix H of Winkler & Kamins, Hypertalk 2.0: The Book is the complete syntax of HyperTalk 2.0, except as modified in Appendix I, "Late Breaking News." BNF is used. (But = instead of ::= ) I wish I had this on disk. Dan Dlugose UNC Educational Computing Service -- Dan Dlugose Internet: dlugose@uncecs.edu UNC Educational Computing Service Box 12035, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2035
jdevoto@Apple.COM (Jeanne A. E. DeVoto) (10/11/90)
In article <11858@pucc.Princeton.EDU> EGNILGES@pucc.Princeton.EDU writes: > 1. How's the standardization effort? Standardization? Of a language that exists in only one implementation? Uh... > 2. Does anybody have a Backus-Naur and/or yacc definition of > the language that they can share with me. *HyperTalk 2.0: The Book* (ISBN 0-553-34737-3) has a railroad-car syntax description of HyperTalk 1.2 and 2.0. I haven't gone over it, but since one of the co-authors of the book is the designer of HyperTalk, I assume it's accurate & complete :-) -- ========= jeanne a. e. devoto ======================================== jdevoto@apple.com | You may not distribute this article under a jdevoto@well.sf.ca.us | compilation copyright without my permission. ______________________________________________________________________ Apple Computer and I are not authorized | CI$: 72411,165 to speak for each other. |
johnston@oscar.ccm.udel.edu (10/11/90)
-- ongoing thread -- >> I have two related questions as to (gack! neep!) Hypertalk considered >> as a (geeble!) programming language. > >(Geeble!) wins the prize for weirdest adjective of the week. > >> 1. How's the standardization effort? > >Standardization? For an embedded language appearing on a single platform? IMHO, standardization (insofar as possible) for XCMD's, scripting, and macro generation should be addressed ASAP by a standards committee composed of developers who employ 'embedded' language features in their applications. One of the regrettable aspects of the proliferation of scripting is that when an individual developer implements a proprietary 'meta-language', or merely adds a new feature to an existing one, ideas are effectively taken out of circulation. In order to incorporate similar features in another scripting language, a new (or thinly disguised) syntax must be employed. Of course, the command "on openStack" will never have a meaning within a White Knight script; loop syntax, however, could be made nearly consistent for many scripting situations. The time to discuss *OPEN* standards for scripting language development is NOW, while the script-able applications for our favorite 'single platform' still have distinct advantages which can be used to justify the purchase of more Macs. If scripting degenerates into a 'free-for-all', Apple stands to lose the competitive advantage it has built through Hypercard development, and *we* end up learning 10 different scripting languages, with exasperating and largely cosmetic differences. My 'geeble' two cents...Bill Johnston (johnston@oscar.ccm.udel.edu) Bill Johnston; 38 Chambers St.; Newark, DE 19711; (302)368-1949
kamins@wet.UUCP (Scot Kamins) (10/13/90)
Summary: Expires: References: <11858@pucc.Princeton.EDU> Sender: Reply-To: kamins@wet.UUCP (Scot Kamins) Followup-To: B Distribution: Organization: Wetware Diversions, San Francisco Keywords: In article <11858@pucc.Princeton.EDU> EGNILGES@pucc.Princeton.EDU writes: >I have two related questions as to (gack! neep!) Hypertalk considered >as a (geeble!) programming language. > > > 1. How's the standardization effort? > > 2. Does anybody have a Backus-Naur and/or yacc definition of > the language that they can share with me. 1. What do you mean? There aren't various versions of the language. Unless you mean differences between 1.# and 2.0. I can tell you that the language is backward compatible with itself. 2. The complete syntax of the language (both versions 1.# and 2.0) appears in formal form in "Hypertalk 2.0: The Book" by Winkler (the author of the language) and Kamins (some other guy with a Loose Quille). :-}
jamesth@microsoft.UUCP (James THIELE) (10/17/90)
In article <45569@apple.Apple.COM> jdevoto@Apple.COM (Jeanne A. E. DeVoto) writes: |*HyperTalk 2.0: The Book* (ISBN 0-553-34737-3) has a railroad-car syntax |description of HyperTalk 1.2 and 2.0. I haven't gone over it, but since |one of the co-authors of the book is the designer of HyperTalk, I assume |it's accurate & complete :-) It is an incomplete BNF, in the sense that not all the syntactic classes/nonterminals are expanded/referenced. What I'm trying to type is that the top and bottom level are good, but it breaks down in the middle. In yet another way, don't expect to transliterate it directly into your favorite parser generator without some massaging. Hope this helps, but perhaps it obscures, James Thiele -- microsoft!jamesth