Pushing this thing.

[richmond62]

My eyes went 'all funny' just now:
-

SShot 2023-08-17 at 19.44.51.png (30.79 KiB) Viewed 4098 times

-
These are my personal requirements.

Of course the ONLY 2 reasons I might want this rather than a version of LC 963 Community are:

1. Apple and their ARM processors.

2. Locking up my code [which is so tediously complicated that any one who can successfully hack it to produce something better is more than welcome].

Yes, Fourthworld: perhaps there does need to be some sort of non-profit organisation set up (if possible) to try and attract money . . .

Certainly for #1 I would gladly find at least $100 from somewhere, and I would hope a lot of other people would do that too.

[FourthWorld]

The proprietary product made by a company unrelated to these forums serves a fundamentally different role than the open source package which is the focus on these forums.

Looking at the opportunity landscape, the rare use case where they may appear interchangeable does not appear common enough to merit much attention.

[tperry2x]

I'm sorry, but

Screenshot at 2023-08-17 18-31-34.png (7.14 KiB) Viewed 4095 times

Hahahahahahaha... oh,.. wait. You mean they are serious?

For all those questions as to why OpenXTalk (or whatever you want to call it) might be worthwhile in getting a new build created, the very fact that it's going to be a free development environment with no commercial lock-in - surely that's reason and motivation enough for people?

I don't get why github is absolutely full of potential coders who love to try and create something meaningful. Not for profit, but as a challenge to hone their programming skills, or just to take on the challenge.
Why can't we attract them to work on OXT?

I've been thinking of other ways to look at this.
If we are purely interested in keeping the xTalk language alive, why not write a language plugin for an already established IDE?
Or start from scratch, creating something that can translate xTalk into C (which is essentially where I come back to a rewrite of the engine).

[FourthWorld]

For all those questions as to why OpenXTalk (or whatever you want to call it) might be worthwhile in getting a new build created, the very fact that it's going to be a free development environment with no commercial lock-in - surely that's reason and motivation enough for people?

That brings it up into the same category as JavaScript, C++, Python, PHP, Swift, Flutter, Go, Rust, R, and most other languages in modern use.

Open source drives development on the 21st century.

Most remaining proprietary languages are holdovers from the '90s, with very few still being actively maintained.

I don't get why github is absolutely full of potential coders who love to try and create something meaningful. Not for profit, but as a challenge to hone their programming skills, or just to take on the challenge.
Why can't we attract them to work on OXT?

A lot of the motivation for delivering free code is making an impact. A useful JavaScript library can be enjoyed by tens of thousands. But how many have even heard of LiveCode?

It's a million-line code base, with a small user base. Hard to wrap one's head around, and for little effect.

I've been thinking of other ways to look at this.
If we are purely interested in keeping the xTalk language alive, why not write a language plugin for an already established IDE?
Or start from scratch, creating something that can translate xTalk into C (which is essentially where I come back to a rewrite of the engine).

Translation from xTalk is famously difficult. I've talked with some of the best minds in the business on this (Bill Appleton, Mark Lucas, Scott Raney, Tom Pittman, Mark Waddingham, Peter Brett, others), and none of them find the prospect worth attempting.

My own interests have me looking at this from another angle:

Remember when HyperCard 2.0 had an option control at the top of the script editor that let you choose which language you were writing in?

At the time they only offered a choice between HyperTalk and AppleScript, but the plan (had v3 ever shipped) was to expand that to all OSA languages.

I'd like to see the option of enjoying the xTalk workflow, but with my choice of LiveCode Script or JavaScript.

Node.js is portable, free, and open. The core ECMAScript is an open standard. It's all there, ripe for the asking.

The missing piece is a "SOM", a Stack Object Model to allow addressing xTalk objects in the way the DOM lets JavaScript address page elements.

Not trivial, but would seem far simpler than anything involving the creation of an entirely new language, or attempting translation. And it would be of interest to a subset of the millions enjoying JavaScript today.