HyperCard Mailing List

I now have a server with php and would like to play with jscard.

http://amor.cms.hu-berlin.de/~engleeri/

the version of jscard i downloaded from Uli's archive seems somewhat broken..

also, i discovered a nifty visual dhtml from netscape from back in oh 1999. it's pretty obviously a hypercard inspired tool.
https://www.vmth.ucdavis.edu/javascript1.2/
(if you google it around 1999 on wayback you can find the zip veentually)

problem is the javascript on it breaks in anything above netscape 4.8
It's because it captures events with outdated unsupported code. unfortunately i am not yet good enough at javascript to fix it.

I know I am not stupid, but for whatever reasons figuring out java has always blocked my brain. I could implement most of my hypercard stacks with javascript. I would Really like to be able to call XION scripts using javascript. Even though java just stops me every time (hypercard spoiled me for any other ide) i still manage to understand javascript, mostly.

http://lexnet.co.cc/msg.htm


--- In HyperCard-Mailing-List, "creysoft" <creysoft@...> wrote:
>
> Hi everyone.
>
> The number of people who've signed up for jsCard accounts has been
> simply amazing. I feel bad for putting the account creation online
> before the whole thing was ready, but rest assured the accounts are
> active. jsCard should be coming online for testing in a few days, and
> I'll be sure to let the list know as soon as it's available.
>
> Thanks again,
>
> - Tyler
>

On 9/5/12 10:08 AM, engleerica wrote:
> I could implement most of my hypercard
> stacks with javascript.

I don't want to discourage you from supporting Tyler's jscard, but is
there a reason you haven't just moved to LiveCode yet? Most of your
stacks will port over with very few changes. You may be one of the
remaining few HC members who isn't over there yet. ;)

--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jacque@[redacted].comHyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

Money ????

--- In HyperCard-Mailing-List, "J. Landman Gay" <jacque@...> wrote:
>
> On 9/5/12 10:08 AM, engleerica wrote:
> > I could implement most of my hypercard
> > stacks with javascript.
>
> I don't want to discourage you from supporting Tyler's jscard, but is
> there a reason you haven't just moved to LiveCode yet? Most of your
> stacks will port over with very few changes. You may be one of the
> remaining few HC members who isn't over there yet. ;)
>
> --
> Jacqueline Landman Gay | jacque@...
> HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
>

Good question. Answer obvious.

Gene H

From: geradamas
To: HyperCard-Mailing-List
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 5:05 AM
Subject: [HC] Re: jsCard Accounts



Money ????

--- In HyperCard-Mailing-List, "J. Landman Gay" <jacque@...> wrote:
>
> On 9/5/12 10:08 AM, engleerica wrote:
> > I could implement most of my hypercard
> > stacks with javascript.
>
> I don't want to discourage you from supporting Tyler's jscard, but is
> there a reason you haven't just moved to LiveCode yet? Most of your
> stacks will port over with very few changes. You may be one of the
> remaining few HC members who isn't over there yet. ;)
>
> --
> Jacqueline Landman Gay | jacque@...
> HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I prefer the hypercard UI and do not like the rev ui.

While I would love to see everyone install the runrev plugin I doubt that will happen. I presume its browser penetration is less than 1%.

I cannot presume end users would download and install either an executable (security) or a plugin (too many clicks, also possible firewalls).

It is not the cost.



--- On Thu, 9/6/12, Gene Henley <mhenley2@[redacted].net wrote:

From: Gene Henley <mhenley2@[redacted].net
Subject: [HC] Re: jsCard Accounts
To: HyperCard-Mailing-List
Date: Thursday, September 6, 2012, 8:51 AM

If you prefer the Hypercard UI then the best thing to do is to purchase Livecode and then use it to set uo Metacard, which is, despite contrary impressions, Livecode with a Hypercard-like UI.

Unless you are making software for a market that runs Macintosh computers that run Mac OS or earlier there really is NO good reason to use Hypercard.

Although Livecode is quite expensive, you can see it as a one-off expense, as, despite the hype, the upgrades do not really justify another financial outlay more often than every 3 to 4 years.

--- In HyperCard-Mailing-List, Eric Engle <eric.engle@...> wrote:
>
> I prefer the hypercard UI and do not like the rev ui.
>
> While I would love to see everyone install the runrev plugin I doubt that will happen. I presume its browser penetration is less than 1%.
>
> I cannot presume end users would download and install either an executable (security) or a plugin (too many clicks, also possible firewalls).
>
> It is not the cost.
>
>
>
> --- On Thu, 9/6/12, Gene Henley <mhenley2@...> wrote:
>
> From: Gene Henley <mhenley2@...>
> Subject: [HC] Re: jsCard Accounts
> To: HyperCard-Mailing-List
> Date: Thursday, September 6, 2012, 8:51 AM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Good question. Answer obvious.
>
>
>
> Gene H
>
>
>
> From: geradamas
>
> To: HyperCard-Mailing-List
>
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 5:05 AM
>
> Subject: [HC] Re: jsCard Accounts
>
>
>
> Money ????
>
>
>
> --- In HyperCard-Mailing-List, "J. Landman Gay" <jacque@> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > On 9/5/12 10:08 AM, engleerica wrote:
>
> > > I could implement most of my hypercard
>
> > > stacks with javascript.
>
> >
>
> > I don't want to discourage you from supporting Tyler's jscard, but is
>
> > there a reason you haven't just moved to LiveCode yet? Most of your
>
> > stacks will port over with very few changes. You may be one of the
>
> > remaining few HC members who isn't over there yet. ;)
>
> >
>
> > --
>
> > Jacqueline Landman Gay | jacque@
>
> > HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
>
> >
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Uh, I *have* a livecode license.

I simply asked about jscard.



--- On Sun, 9/9/12, geradamas <richmond@[redacted].maclaunchcom> wrote:

From: geradamas <richmond@[redacted].maclaunchcom>
Subject: [HC] Re: jsCard Accounts
To: HyperCard-Mailing-List
Date: Sunday, September 9, 2012, 1:17 PM

At 17:17 +0000 2012.09.09, geradamas wrote:

>If you prefer the Hypercard UI then the best thing to do is to
>purchase Livecode and then use it to set uo Metacard, which is,
>despite contrary impressions, Livecode with a Hypercard-like UI.

Years ago I converted several modest-sized stacks to SuperCard; it
was a difficult and frustrating experience. They said 90% (or was it
95%?) of the text in scripts goes right over. Probably true, but the
last 5% or 10% used up many hours, and lead to much anger and
frustration at the sometimes difficult to understand error messages.

Example that I remember: If the formal parameter of a handler happens
to be a name that SC thinks is reserved (even though HC doesn't), you
get a misleading diagnostic AT THE CALL PLACE and not in the handler
where the error is. Another: HC lets a button have a value and SC
does not. You can get the functionality by giving the button an
attribute, but the recoding can be time consuming. Quite a few of my
buttons have values.

Another: HC's 'start using' command makes it easy to use a personal
library of handlers. The equivalent feature in SC was much harder to
use. (I don't remember what the problem was.)

Maybe some of these problems are fixed in LC as opposed to SC? Has
anyone on this list any recent experience?

>Unless you are making software for a market that runs Macintosh
>computers that run Mac OS or earlier there really is NO good reason
>to use Hypercard.

HC runs just fine under SheepShaver, which runs well on Snow Leopard.
The last time I looked (some months ago) it was "almost ready" for
Mountain Lion.

>Although Livecode is quite expensive, you can see it as a one-off
>expense, as, despite the hype, the upgrades do not really justify
>another financial outlay more often than every 3 to 4 years.

LC is NOT expensive if you're going to use it for just a short time.
Just pay a monthly fee till you're done. If you're going to host on
only Apple products I think it's $25/month. I may even spring for
that to see if conversion has gotten easier. If it has then I might
fork over the $400 for a perpetual license.

Art Evans

On Sep 9, 2012, at 6:05 PM, Arthur Evans Jr wrote:

> HC runs just fine under SheepShaver, which runs well on Snow Leopard.
> The last time I looked (some months ago) it was "almost ready" for
> Mountain Lion.

It was just updated a couple of weeks ago:

http://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/20615/sheepshaver


Note the known issues.


Terry Bowman, KA4HJH
"The Mac Doctor"

I have both Supercard and Revolution (now LiveCode), and I prefer Supercard and recommend it.
Harold Mauro



On 09/09/2012, at 19:05, Arthur Evans Jr wrote:

> At 17:17 +0000 2012.09.09, geradamas wrote:
>
> >If you prefer the Hypercard UI then the best thing to do is to
> >purchase Livecode and then use it to set uo Metacard, which is,
> >despite contrary impressions, Livecode with a Hypercard-like UI.
>
> Years ago I converted several modest-sized stacks to SuperCard; it
> was a difficult and frustrating experience. They said 90% (or was it
> 95%?) of the text in scripts goes right over. Probably true, but the
> last 5% or 10% used up many hours, and lead to much anger and
> frustration at the sometimes difficult to understand error messages.
>
> Example that I remember: If the formal parameter of a handler happens
> to be a name that SC thinks is reserved (even though HC doesn't), you
> get a misleading diagnostic AT THE CALL PLACE and not in the handler
> where the error is. Another: HC lets a button have a value and SC
> does not. You can get the functionality by giving the button an
> attribute, but the recoding can be time consuming. Quite a few of my
> buttons have values.
>
> Another: HC's 'start using' command makes it easy to use a personal
> library of handlers. The equivalent feature in SC was much harder to
> use. (I don't remember what the problem was.)
>
> Maybe some of these problems are fixed in LC as opposed to SC? Has
> anyone on this list any recent experience?
>
> >Unless you are making software for a market that runs Macintosh
> >computers that run Mac OS or earlier there really is NO good reason
> >to use Hypercard.
>
> HC runs just fine under SheepShaver, which runs well on Snow Leopard.
> The last time I looked (some months ago) it was "almost ready" for
> Mountain Lion.
>
> >Although Livecode is quite expensive, you can see it as a one-off
> >expense, as, despite the hype, the upgrades do not really justify
> >another financial outlay more often than every 3 to 4 years.
>
> LC is NOT expensive if you're going to use it for just a short time.
> Just pay a monthly fee till you're done. If you're going to host on
> only Apple products I think it's $25/month. I may even spring for
> that to see if conversion has gotten easier. If it has then I might
> fork over the $400 for a perpetual license.
>
> Art Evans
>

On 9/9/12 5:05 PM, Arthur Evans Jr wrote:
> I may even spring for
> that to see if conversion has gotten easier. If it has then I might

Almost all your scripts will work as you expect in LiveCode. "Start
using" works the same way as in HC. Buttons can hold values. Incorrect
parameters will break with an error in the receiving handler, not in the
calling handler.

Since HC has only a few hundred keywords and LiveCode has about 2500,
you can probably expect to encounter reserved word errors. LiveCode has
a replacement dialog that can replace all instances of one word with
another one in every script in the stack at once; that's handy for these
situations.

Since no modern OS has resource forks, you'll need to move any embedded
resources into the stack. Icons and sounds are moved automatically for
you when the stack opens in LiveCode. Usually that's enough. If your
stacks use icons from the Home stack, then move them into your own stack
before conversion so they'll come over. Or use the HC icon set library I
uploaded to the User Samples area in LiveCode.

You'll need to rewrite any externals and menubars. You'll almost never
need any externals; almost everything we need them for in HC is already
in LiveCode natively. Menus are built entirely differently and you'll
need to redo those from scratch.

There's a tutorial on conversion at my web site.

--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jacque@[redacted].comHyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

On 9/9/12 5:36 PM, KA4HJH wrote:
>
> On Sep 9, 2012, at 6:05 PM, Arthur Evans Jr wrote:
>
>> HC runs just fine under SheepShaver, which runs well on Snow Leopard.
>> The last time I looked (some months ago) it was "almost ready" for
>> Mountain Lion.
>
> It was just updated a couple of weeks ago:
>
> http://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/20615/sheepshaver

Thanks! I use it all the time, a huge chunk of my work is converting old
HC stacks.

Still wondering where that odd name came from though.

--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jacque@[redacted].comHyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

On 9/9/12 5:05 PM, I wrote a list of problems I encountered years ago
trying to convert HC stacks, finally saying that I might try LiveCode
if the situation had improved. In response J. Landman Gay wrote a
marvelously complete answer to my obhjections.

Jacqueline: please accept my thanks. I will try LiveCode.

I had mentioned that I now use SheepShaver to run HC stacks and Jacqueline said

>Still wondering where that odd name came from though.

Here's the answer, from Wikipedia's page on SheepShaver:

>The name is a play on ShapeShifter, a Macintosh II emulator for
>AmigaOS (made obsolete by Basilisk II), which is in turn not to be
>confused with a third-party preference pane for Mac OS X with the
>same name. The ShapeShifter and SheepShaver projects were originally
>conceived and programmed by Christian Bauer. However, the main
>developer behind SheepShaver, of late, has been Gwenolé Beauchesne.

The source for all SS information is www.emaculation.com, but if you
Google SheepShaver you get messages saying that the site seems to
have been compromised. Other entries on Google's page make it look as
if Google is correct. Be careful.

Art Evans

On 9/10/12 7:58 PM, Arthur Evans Jr wrote:
>
> Here's the answer, from Wikipedia's page on SheepShaver:

Thanks! I didn't know that.

Now that I've convinced you to try LiveCode, brace yourself for a few
weeks of frustration. It's so much like HC that you won't expect the
differences. There's a bit of a hump to get over, then it's back to
normal. DunbarX went through it, he'll help you. :)

Also, join the forums or the mailing list. They're like this list used
to be, and almost everyone from here is also over there. No question is
too naive and everyone will help.

--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jacque@[redacted].comHyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

> the last new user

Sounds like a movie title. "In a world that has forgotten HyperCard, one
brave man picks up the banner and makes a stand. He is -- THE LAST NEW
USER."

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]