Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Sun, 13 Apr 2008 21:16:49 -0400 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Obviously you should do it however you think best. I apologize if I
caused any confusion.
As for legibility, it's obviously subjective. I personally find the
"set {x,y} to {y,x}" form much clearer - in the course of reading the
longer version I lose track of the fact that we're just swapping two
elements of the list. Likewise the "repeat with" loop tells me right
up front that we're counting down, so I don't have to decode the
logic.
On 4/13/08, Chuck Pelto <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> On Apr 13, 2008, at 4:06 PM, Mark J. Reed wrote:
>
> > ? What higher forms of math? The math is the same. All I did was
> > take advantage of a couple AppleScript constructs that cut down on the
> > amount of code required.
>
> Okay....
>
> ....allow me to rephrase my comment. Not so much the 'math', but the
> 'language'. I prefer something closer to REAL English. That's one of
> the virtues of AppleScript; it comes very close to recognizable English.
>
> Thanks Again,
>
> Chuck
>
--
Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com
Mark J. Reed <[log in to unmask]>
|
|
|