Novel Thoughts on Scripting and Languages

James Huang judoscript at hotmail.com
Fri Jan 10 06:31:21 CET 2003


grante at visi.com (Grant Edwards) wrote in message news:<3e1de2b7$0$25512$a1866201 at newsreader.visi.com>...
> In article <52719db8.0301082259.535824a4 at posting.google.com>, James Huang wrote:
> 
> > Allow me to give my non-scientific definition of scripting language:
> > 
> > Scripting (in programming sense)
> >================================
> > is to do things easily, intuitively, obviously, and accurately, so
> > much so that when another person (with the same domain knowledge) sees
> > a chunk of code, he immediately understands it without even a hint of
> > reasoning (ideally).
> 
> I don't think that's a common definition of "scripting". I'd
> say that what you stated above is (or should be) a goal for any
> programming language of any type.

You are serious?

> 
> I would define scripting as writing a program to automate a
> repetative task that might normally done manually (via a series
> of GUI point and click operations or a series of manually
> entered shell commands).

Automation is certainly a scripting activity. Scripting (as Terry
Hancock pointed, perhaps years agon) is a matter of usage. When one
wants to do something quickly, one needs [my definition]; otherwise,
to make library most re-usable, APIs have to be low-level, with
fine-granularity and that leads to something totally in the opposite
direction. Nothing wrong of course, but they are not good for
scripting. Java APIs is not much different, BTW.




More information about the Python-list mailing list