Skip navigation
Newsgroup_User
Newsgroup_User
Currently Being Moderated

Lingo vs Javascript

Jul 22, 2008 6:17 AM

Just wondering how many of you are actually using javascript and/or mixed
language projects.
And has anyone actually switched to using js since it was introduced?
Sure, js's syntax is common, and it was supposed to make director more
attractive for new users, and it is stricter, resulting to tidier code, plus
supports several neat stuff, and it's item accessing is zero based. All good
so far. However, there are some handy lingo-specific concepts that are not
js compatible. Most important perhaps, the ability to pass 1-2 arguments to
properties. In lingo, when you use string.char[1], it is interpreted as:
a. attempt to get property #char, passing 1 as argument to the property
request.
If property arguments are supported by the object, and if '1' is valid for
.char, then return the result. Otherwise:
b. return the property .char, and try to perform a getAt(1).
With js, there is no first step - it is always two commands- where with
lingo it is either one or two.
Js is stricter, lingo is (or at least tries to be) smarter and faster.
But in programming, 'smarter' also means more checks, so smarter code could
also be slower code. In the above example, if step a succeeds, then lingo is
faster, otherwise it is slower. Btw, since js doesn't support passing
arguments to property requests, director(native) or third party(xtras) code
that expect such arguments will fail ( which is the js equivalent for "ab
cd".word[2] ? )
Anyways, back to the original question. What is it for you? JS or Lingo?



283 Views   8 Replies   Latest reply: fazstp, Aug 10, 2008 5:51 PM
 
Replies
  • Newsgroup_User
    Currently Being Moderated
    1. Newsgroup_User,
    Jul 22, 2008 6:31 AM   in reply to Newsgroup_User
    Report
    I see very few incentives to move from Lingo to JS. If you don't know
    Lingo, and you do know JS (or ActionScript) then JS can be a more
    approachable way to get into Director. But there is no payoff in
    someone who knows Lingo moving into JS.

    I do use a few things that JS syntax enables that is nonexistent in
    Lingo, like RegEx and some string handling capabilities (like
    toLower()), but in general, I will write a small wrapper handler in JS
    around the function and then call it from Lingo.

    But then I'm old school and still use verbose syntax in many cases.
     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Ex Malterra
    Currently Being Moderated
    2. Ex Malterra,
    Jul 22, 2008 8:53 AM   in reply to Newsgroup_User
    Report
    I much prefer JavaScript. I never liked Lingo syntax, probably because the first scripting I ever learned was JavaScript. JS is the reason I upgraded to MX 2004. Having mostly used C++, C#, Java, JavaScript and ActionScript 2.0 I'm simply more used to their syntax. Sure, some things require just a little more to do in JS vice Lingo... like symbol("someSymbol") instead of #someSymbol, but for me personally it's more than worth it. And I gotta tell ya, try/catch is great! The error info thrown isn't always especially useful, heck it's usually not useful at all for that matter, but you generally know what might go wrong in your code at those points anyway.

    No offense meant to the fans of Lingo. I don't think it's crappy or anything; I just prefer JS.
     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Newsgroup_User
    Currently Being Moderated
    3. Newsgroup_User,
    Jul 22, 2008 9:00 AM   in reply to Newsgroup_User
    Report
    Thanks Mike - I'd guessed so, for you and most elder list members.

    Actually, and besides general interest, my concern is how crucial is for an
    Xtra to support js. You see, there are some property accessing methods that
    can enhance lingo scripting greatly, but simply won't work with js.

    "Mike Blaustein" <mblaustein@gmail.com> wrote in message
    news:g64nfq$55l$1@forums.macromedia.com...
    >I see very few incentives to move from Lingo to JS. If you don't know
    >Lingo, and you do know JS (or ActionScript) then JS can be a more
    >approachable way to get into Director. But there is no payoff in someone
    >who knows Lingo moving into JS.
    >
    > I do use a few things that JS syntax enables that is nonexistent in Lingo,
    > like RegEx and some string handling capabilities (like toLower()), but in
    > general, I will write a small wrapper handler in JS around the function
    > and then call it from Lingo.
    >
    > But then I'm old school and still use verbose syntax in many cases.


     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Newsgroup_User
    Currently Being Moderated
    4. Newsgroup_User,
    Jul 22, 2008 9:13 AM   in reply to Newsgroup_User
    Report
    > No offense meant to the fans of Lingo. I don't think it's crappy or
    > anything;
    > I just prefer JS.

    None taken. (how could?).. Though personally, I'm spending more time coding
    c (js-like syntax) than lingo, I still prefer lingo when it comes to
    director. And that's because of the generally more compact code for command
    line tests / small scripts. For bigger projects perhaps using js is better.
    But, though very familiar with both director and js syntax, actually using
    js with director still requires getting accustomed to... Not to mention
    referencing the help files...


    "Ex Malterra" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in message
    news:g64vp3$e49$1@forums.macromedia.com...
    >I much prefer JavaScript. I never liked Lingo syntax, probably because the
    > first scripting I ever learned was JavaScript. JS is the reason I upgraded
    > to
    > MX 2004. Having mostly used C++, C#, Java, JavaScript and ActionScript 2.0
    > I'm
    > simply more used to their syntax. Sure, some things require just a little
    > more
    > to do in JS vice Lingo... like symbol("someSymbol") instead of
    > #someSymbol, but
    > for me personally it's more than worth it. And I gotta tell ya, try/catch
    > is
    > great! The error info thrown isn't always especially useful, heck it's
    > usually
    > not useful at all for that matter, but you generally know what might go
    > wrong
    > in your code at those points anyway.
    >
    > No offense meant to the fans of Lingo. I don't think it's crappy or
    > anything;
    > I just prefer JS.
    >


     
    |
    Mark as:
  • mziskandar
    Currently Being Moderated
    5. mziskandar,
    Jul 22, 2008 8:48 PM   in reply to Newsgroup_User
    Report
    I prefer Lingo over js in Director..
    1. Examples - a lot on the web.
    2. Easier to learn - from the examples.
    3. Performance - maybe its the same - It will depend on your code - learn from the examples.
    4. Support/troubleshooting - almost all seniors in Director using Lingo.
     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Newsgroup_User
    Currently Being Moderated
    6. Newsgroup_User,
    Jul 22, 2008 9:28 PM   in reply to Newsgroup_User
    Report
    Good points, mziskandar.
    > 2. Easier to learn
    I doubt that many languages with similar functionality can claim to be
    easier
    than lingo. None that I know of, at least.

    > 3. Performance
    Director was built for lingo. Therefore, internally, even though for certain
    functions js could settle with less arguments (since it won't use them all,
    anyway) leading to faster execution speed, space for all arguments is
    allocated, as required for lingo. That's the case with Xtras, so I'd bet it
    is also the case with native objects.


    "mziskandar" <mziskandar@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:g669mq$rn6$1@forums.macromedia.com...
    >I prefer Lingo over js in Director..
    > 1. Examples - a lot on the web.
    > 2. Easier to learn - from the examples.
    > 3. Performance - maybe its the same - It will depend on your code - learn
    > from
    > the examples.
    > 4. Support/troubleshooting - almost all seniors in Director using Lingo.
    >
    >




     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Newsgroup_User
    Currently Being Moderated
    7. Newsgroup_User,
    Aug 10, 2008 9:44 AM   in reply to Newsgroup_User
    Report
    I have been coding with Lingo since the mid 90s and would like to learn
    more JavaScript, but just find it too difficult. I would like to do
    more with Flash as well, but find it way to difficult. Director and
    Lingo is so much easier and there are a lot of examples to learn from.
    When I look at JavaScript examples, I have a great deal of difficulty
    understanding them. The object orientation is powerful, and if you
    understand C++ and other complicated languages like that, JavaScript is
    easier to pick up. Unfortunately, when I see functions with (this) in
    them, I have trouble following what's going on. So, thank god for Lingo
    - it sure makes life a lot easier for people to learn scripting that are
    not professional C++ programmers.
     
    |
    Mark as:
  • fazstp
    Currently Being Moderated
    8. fazstp,
    Aug 10, 2008 5:51 PM   in reply to Newsgroup_User
    Report
    I started to dabble in Javascript because it does have some useful functions that are hard to replicate in Lingo but I got scared off when a try-catch bug crapped out my data.

     
    |
    Mark as:
Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)