Re: [slang-users] new slang 2 development snapshot released

[Ben Duncan <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Yup, Syntax errors caught.

Had a chance to see Delphi and Kylix in action today - that is the programming
side.

In comparison to Appgen programming:

An Appgen program  has a header record "PROG.DEF" which defines the program name,
description, and a "FILE List", which File 1 is the "Acted upon" file (except
for posting Definitions, in which case File 1 is POSTED TO Subsequent files).

Field Functions are referenced in a DataBasic fashion : A(1,1) would mean file
one, attribute one. SInce it is MULTI Value, you can have a A(1,1,1), where
you have a "sub attribute" reference in field 1.

Appgen defines EACH "field" as a record. The record contains all the "row / column"
prompt description, data "typing" (Date, Phone, Alpha, numeric, numeric-decimal), on-line
help information, then the "before", default, key, verify, after routines.

The runtime takes care of lining up and parsing based upon a "execution sequence"
number in each field record, but does so in a two stage process. First is to paint
and parse each field to the screen (using screen routines) as well as the "functions".
The next is as you are going down each prompt (If you are in add mode), or whatever
field, if you are in change mode. The prompt(s) to Attribute zero are always key to the
record, so if you "get a hit", the runtime assumes a "change" mode, otherwise it allocates
the record and you are in add mode.

Delphi/Kylix do a "form" with more traditional script syntax. YOu define a "header",
put in the "form names", define variables, code procedures in the traditional method.
you "Display/Show" the form, then code the action as you walk down form.


Now a question to the "WORLD" out there, should I follow the more "traditional" mode
ala DElphi/FoxPro/Python - which would mean I am about 80% complete with SLAG then,
since I do not have to create a Runtime engine, or try and emulate the very NONTRADITIONAL
method Appgen uses, which means I am at 50% complete with SLAG ?

John E. Davis wrote:
> Paul Boekholt <p.boekholt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > As I understand it, Ben just wants his code snippets to be checked for
> > syntax errors.  Eval() will execute the code as well, definitely not what
>
>
> Right.  But as long as his code snippets consist of functions then
> eval will be ok.
>
>
> > he wants.  What does byte-compiling do?
>
>
> That is another idea since the act of byte-compiling parses the code.
>
> Thanks,
> --John
>
> _______________________________________________
> To unsubscribe, visit http://jedsoft.org/slang/mailinglists.html

--
Ben Duncan   - VersAccounting Software LLC 336 Elton Road  Jackson MS, 39212
"Never attribute to malice, that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
       - Hanlon's Razor


_______________________________________________
To unsubscribe, visit http://jedsoft.org/slang/mailinglists.html