Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Question about LScript in general

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Lampertheim, Germany
    Posts
    129

    Question about LScript in general

    Is LScript farther on the list of the developers to fix Problems, or is it completely deleted from the Focus of the developers?

    The reason why I ask is the extensiv push on python.

    I don't like python, what is no secret. The reason why I don't like it is the extremely write intensive art. I don't want to write novellas to get a script running. This only cost me working time.

    I know, that python is widely spread and many applications use this language.
    BUT: The lightwave gods had implemented a language which can used very well.

    Please LW-Gods give the users the possibility to reach every command of lightwave via LScript.
    I know that you can reach more in python, but only because it is implemented. Why is not all implemented in LScript?

    Now my question again.
    Does it make sense to use the Feedback Agent on LScript bugs or whishes? Or is this with no Chance because the developers don't lay Hands on LScript anymore?

    Maybe a LW God can give a short answer to this.

    I am also interested in Hearing from others how they think about this.


    Regards,
    KANUSO

  2. #2
    You can try but more time will probably go into python than lscript. Lscript is basically a dead language. It offers no benefits to those of us that need python for pipelines that involve multiple programs. Python is viewed as industry standard for scripting language.
    My opinions and comments do not represent those of my employer.
    www.ernestpchan.com
    www.zazzle.com/gopuggo

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Lampertheim, Germany
    Posts
    129
    Ok, you are right, python is ok for those who want/must interact with other applications. But most of the scripts don't care about the world outside of LW. I don't want to write novallas even for the simples Tasks. LScript is perfect for Tasks inside LW and can be written without blabla.blabla.blabla.blabla.makethis(). I do not want to tell from the 100th to the 1000th to do a simple Task like makethis(). Even I do not find a way to bind a python-script direct into the menu, to reach it in a simple way. OK maybe there is a way, but I do not find it.

    Most of the scripts for LW simply uses LW and not application X or Y.

    It is like in the discussion in the LW-Commuity http://forums.newtek.com/showthread....ase-be-careful

    We simply Need a fast way to work. Why should we use LW, if we get all as complicated as in other programs?

    In short words: LScript is (or should I say 'was') a fine way to do the things with no complicating rules and in a short time.
    For me (and I hope I am not allone) LScript is the best way for scripts that uses only LW (I think this will be so with the most scripts). Why should I use python for LW internal Tasks which can be done much simpler in LScript? But if LScript is dead from the developement, it throws us to python sooner or later, and that makes the work with LW more and more complicated.

    Yes, you are right, python has it's 'be there authorization' for interacting with other applications. But must it really be to use python for simple internal Tasks? Especially if LScript is already there. Please hold it up to date.

    If all things are getting as complicated as in other applications, than there is no reason to use LW anymore. If I want it complicated, than I can use even other programs.

    I hope I will not be missunderstood, at the Moment LW is my Favorit, but as so as in the discussion in the LW-Community, if the things getting more and more complicated, there will be no reason to me to use LW in the future.

    Regards,
    KANUSO

    Edit:
    OK, I have found how to put a python to a button or menu.
    I will give python a Chance, but I don't think, that I would be ever happy with this Situation. Because if I want to travel from Paris to Rome, I don't want to get a stopover in Melbourne, only becaus I 'can' reach 20 more destinations from there... I simply want from Paris to Rome....

    And why can't we get both?
    Last edited by KANUSO; 03-25-2018 at 06:06 AM.

  4. #4
    I understand your point of view. All I can say is that submit the feature requests you need for lscript but with NewTek's limited resources and with python viewed as the more important option your feature requests may or may not get addressed.
    My opinions and comments do not represent those of my employer.
    www.ernestpchan.com
    www.zazzle.com/gopuggo

  5. #5
    Super Member Kryslin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Prescott, IA
    Posts
    1,496
    I, too, wish lscript would continue to be updated. One of my in house scripts is fairly large (A fractal foil - terrain - generator), for a single file script, and I do not relish the thought of converting that 1200 line script to python...

    Though it may actually be much shorter, because most of that length is the simplex noise generator and it's data table.
    --------
    My Scripts for Lightwave
    Intel Core i7 960 @3.20 Ghz, 24 GB ram, EVGA 6GB GTX980Ti "Classified" driving 2 x HP LA2405.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by KANUSO View Post
    Please LW-Gods give the users the possibility to reach every command of lightwave via LScript.
    yes please.
    And do it for Python too.
    And do it everytime you add a feature to lightwave.
    And give us the power to read the status of Lightwave button and action too. (active (1) or not active (0) but not switch()...)

    This god, if he exists (which I doubt), has a lot of work to do.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •