The basis for an xtalk engine [I/we] control

A place to discuss any and all xTalk implementations, not just LC LCC Forks, but HyperCard, SuperCard, MetaCard, Gain Momentum, Oracle MediaTalk, OpenXION, etc.
Forum rules
Please limit any bashing/harping on any commercial interests to a minimum, thanks!
Post Reply
dandandandan
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu May 05, 2022 9:02 pm
Contact:

Re: The basis for an xtalk engine [I/we] control

Post by dandandandan »

If you go to System Preferences -> Keyboard -> Keyboard Shortcuts -> App Shortcuts -> Safari -> [+] you can change the Minimize command shortcut to something else. Then command M will show the message box in the simulator instead. It drove me crazy always doing it...
User avatar
richmond62
Posts: 5224
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 11:03 am
Location: Bulgaria
Contact:

Re: The basis for an xtalk engine [I/we] control

Post by richmond62 »

Aye, but . . .

It might be slightly unrealistic to expect end-users all to do that.
https://richmondmathewson.owlstown.net/
User avatar
tperry2x
Posts: 3488
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2021 9:10 pm
Location: Somewhere in deepest darkest Norfolk, England
Contact:

Re: The basis for an xtalk engine [I/we] control

Post by tperry2x »

OpenXTalkPaul wrote: Fri Apr 11, 2025 11:50 pm Adding Command+M for Mac won't work for in-Browser context on macOS because the browsers treat ou[r]'web stacks' like any other document window in an app and so it minimizes the window into the Dock. It's a problem with HyperCard Sim and Emscripten Engine too. Something other than Cmn+M, like command+option+shift+M might work.
Typical. That sounds very much like a MacOS problem then. I'll keep it ctrl M for everything in that case.
User avatar
richmond62
Posts: 5224
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 11:03 am
Location: Bulgaria
Contact:

Re: The basis for an xtalk engine [I/we] control

Post by richmond62 »

I'll keep it ctrl M for everything in that case.
Sensible. 8-)

Except for kinky characters like Uncle Richmond (who skips merrily back and forth between Macs and Linux) who has played "silly buggers" with the key layouts on ALL his Macs:
-
Screenshot 2025-04-12 at 10.19.25.png
Screenshot 2025-04-12 at 10.19.25.png (107.66 KiB) Viewed 3929 times
-
And a Very Happy Saturday morning to Thee . . . and here he is, the original thorn in the flesh. :lol:
https://richmondmathewson.owlstown.net/
User avatar
OpenXTalkPaul
Posts: 2793
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2021 4:19 pm
Contact:

Re: The basis for an xtalk engine [I/we] control

Post by OpenXTalkPaul »

richmond62 wrote: Sat Apr 12, 2025 7:18 am
I'll keep it ctrl M for everything in that case.
Sensible. 8-)

Except for kinky characters like Uncle Richmond (who skips merrily back and forth between Macs and Linux) who has played "silly buggers" with the key layouts on ALL his Macs:
-
Screenshot 2025-04-12 at 10.19.25.png
-
And a Very Happy Saturday morning to Thee . . . and here he is, the original thorn in the flesh. :lol:
I've always done the reverse, make Linux file manager and other key commands on Linux use the macOS keyboard positions for special modifier keys, ergonomically I think it's better, and it's what my muscle memory has been programmed with for 35+ years, so....

Anyway, I think this is the correct behavior as 'web apps' are basically web browser documents windows, if you want desktop app behavior you need to build a desktop app (or wrap the web app with one, like Electron or similar).

But I've had to switch back and forth between platforms enough that I can manage the occasional left-hand rotate + extra stretch from Control to the M key with thumb + middle fingers on one hand (the right hand is for the mouse).
User avatar
richmond62
Posts: 5224
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 11:03 am
Location: Bulgaria
Contact:

Re: The basis for an xtalk engine [I/we] control

Post by richmond62 »

leftHandW.png
leftHandW.png (261.79 KiB) Viewed 3736 times
https://richmondmathewson.owlstown.net/
User avatar
tperry2x
Posts: 3488
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2021 9:10 pm
Location: Somewhere in deepest darkest Norfolk, England
Contact:

Re: The basis for an xtalk engine [I/we] control

Post by tperry2x »

Since Linux and Windows use ctrl, and MacOS uses CMD, then it's 2 against one. Three against one if you count Haiku (which I am) 8-)

Hiding message box, ctrl M, and running the script I typed in the message box (even if it's hidden) ctrl return / enter.
hiding-message-box.gif
hiding-message-box.gif (65.18 KiB) Viewed 3705 times
TerryL
Posts: 130
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2021 5:05 pm
Contact:

Re: The basis for an xtalk engine [I/we] control

Post by TerryL »

Thanks Tom for the syntax clarifications. I've updated to WebTalk-131. As you post webtalk doc.pdf's, I'll try to keep the dict-database updated, new entries at the top next time. Ask with multiple entry field support, nice.
Attachments
WebTalk Dict.zip
(6.95 KiB) Downloaded 81 times
User avatar
OpenXTalkPaul
Posts: 2793
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2021 4:19 pm
Contact:

Re: The basis for an xtalk engine [I/we] control

Post by OpenXTalkPaul »

tperry2x wrote: Sat Apr 12, 2025 7:48 pm Since Linux and Windows use ctrl, and MacOS uses CMD, then it's 2 against one. Three against one if you count Haiku (which I am) 8-)

Hiding message box, ctrl M, and running the script I typed in the message box (even if it's hidden) ctrl return / enter.
hiding-message-box.gif
It's fine, same as HC Sim used, and then if I want to minimize my web-tinkering sesh its the normal minimize command key. It would bother me in a mac desktop standalone app though.
On OS level as long as we can set modifier keys the way one likes on the system then it doesn't matter so much.
User avatar
tperry2x
Posts: 3488
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2021 9:10 pm
Location: Somewhere in deepest darkest Norfolk, England
Contact:

Re: The basis for an xtalk engine [I/we] control

Post by tperry2x »

Well, for better or for worse - depends on your outlook - the parser, tokenizer, and lexer approach isn't going to work I feel - not for a javascript implementation. I've been struggling with it for the best part of a month now and it's never going to be up to par with the regex version I made previously.

I'm going back to version 132 where I used a regex version.

I'll copy 133 and all my incremental changes I've done into that shared folder Paul, and you and Dan can work on it from now on. Feel free to do what you want with it. Put it in github, whatever.

I'll continue with my regex version (possibly for my own amusement only) from now on.
User avatar
richmond62
Posts: 5224
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 11:03 am
Location: Bulgaria
Contact:

Re: The basis for an xtalk engine [I/we] control

Post by richmond62 »

I'll continue with my regex version (possibly for my own amusement only) from now on.
You could provide some 'amusement' for some other people by releasing this into the wild . . .
https://richmondmathewson.owlstown.net/
TerryL
Posts: 130
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2021 5:05 pm
Contact:

Re: The basis for an xtalk engine [I/we] control

Post by TerryL »

Tom, awaiting your return to resume development of WebTalk. Standing by....
User avatar
OpenXTalkPaul
Posts: 2793
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2021 4:19 pm
Contact:

Re: The basis for an xtalk engine [I/we] control

Post by OpenXTalkPaul »

TerryL wrote: Wed Apr 23, 2025 6:03 pm Tom, awaiting your return to resume development of WebTalk. Standing by....
Same here. I really want some more UI objects to play with. As far as parsing script goes I really don't care which unerlying method(s) are used, and for the most part I can adjust to work with differences in an interpreter (such as not using elaborate compound chunk expressions in a single line of script), it wouldn't be the first time I've had to, but writing xTalk scripts isn't nearly as much fun with only a few basic objects to manipulate, and I'm excited to see what sort of NEW features can be added as a result of having a web browser as the back end 'engine' (like text fields on an angle or curved path, or 3D transforms for image controls). In the meantime I'll continue to play around with SimpleTalk or modifying HC Sim, since those are also built on top of JavaScript/HTML at least some of it should be useful for 'webtalk'.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests