Talk:Letter frequency: Difference between revisions
m
→AppleScript functionally composed variant
Line 126:
:Yours works very well for the latter context (possibly at the cost of how much time it take to write and debug) though I personally might reach for another language when performance or scale are what I need. (In a macOS scripting context, the same composition of pure functions runs very fast in JavaScript for Automation, for example. I hardly need to tell you that AppleScript records are not famous for their speed or powers of introspection). By the time we have to reach for ObjC Foundation classes to get some usable performance at any scale, AppleScript has really rather lost the bloom of its charm and claims to accessibility, and may be an implausible or inappropriate instrument to reach for anyway.
:To avoid the risk of a faintly comic impression, might it make sense for us to find a slightly more illuminating, and more widely understood alternative to "straightforward" ? My approach obviously seems more "straightforward" to me – that's a symmetrical relationship :-) Perhaps ''Imperative'' ? ''Procedural'' ? Something else which has some precedent and familiarity on Rosetta Code, and will immediately be intelligible ? [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 10:17, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
| |||