SuperCard stacks

Want to talk about something that isn't covered by another category?

Moderators: FourthWorld, heatherlaine, Klaus, kevinmiller, robinmiller

Post Reply
richmond62
Livecode Opensource Backer
Livecode Opensource Backer
Posts: 9286
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:17 am
Location: Bulgaria

SuperCard stacks

Post by richmond62 » Fri Dec 18, 2020 3:01 pm

Is there a way that LiveCode can open (old) SuperCard stacks
in any sort of meaningful way?

https://supercard.us/index.html

Obviously this lot are not rushing to capture the market:

"SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS: Universal Binary supports any Apple Macintosh running MacOS Tiger through Mojave.
Note that SuperCard is NOT compatible with Catalina."
-
Screenshot 2020-12-18 at 16.07.02.png
-
Not being able to resist . . .
-
Screenshot 2020-12-18 at 16.04.57.png
Last edited by richmond62 on Fri Dec 18, 2020 3:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

richmond62
Livecode Opensource Backer
Livecode Opensource Backer
Posts: 9286
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:17 am
Location: Bulgaria

Re: SuperCard stacks

Post by richmond62 » Fri Dec 18, 2020 3:12 pm

Here's a classic excuse:

"Is SuperCard 64-bit?
SuperCard 4.8.1 remains 32-bit. Unfortunately, producing a 64-bit version of SuperCard requires a complete rewrite of the software as Apple has gone back on their promise to deliver 64-bit Carbon frameworks. This is a tremendous undertaking, and while the current version has made some inroads in this regard, currently it is unknown how long it will take or if it is even possible."

(My highlighting)

"if it is even possible."

That makes me really appreciate the work done by Kevin, Mark and all the other "merry boys and girls" up at
LiveCode central.

FourthWorld
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
VIP Livecode Opensource Backer
Posts: 9802
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2006 7:05 am
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Re: SuperCard stacks

Post by FourthWorld » Fri Dec 18, 2020 7:51 pm

richmond62 wrote:
Fri Dec 18, 2020 3:01 pm
Is there a way that LiveCode can open (old) SuperCard stacks
in any sort of meaningful way?
Directly, no. But both languages allow complete introspection, so it's possible to output SC projects to an intermediary descriptive format, and have an interpreter in LC which reads that format to reconstruct it.

LiveCode Ltd used to offer one way back when they were RunRev Ltd; I wrote one for a project I did around the turn of the century; Ken Ray had a more comprehensive one, possibly the best.

In those days a good chunk of my work was porting SC stuff to LC. I've done it enough to feel very strongly that it isn't worth it. In fact, it's rarely worth direct porting between any two systems with different object models.

SC and LC are close enough that it's seductively attractive to consider one-to-one object recreation. But if you're sufficiently familiar with the strengths and weaknesses of each, it becomes clear that how we structure good SC projects is quite different from how we structure good LC projects.

Menus, groups, windows, and other fundamentals are handled with both different properties and different syntax. Faithfully reproducing an excellent SC work in LC results in a poor LC structure.

My advice for clients is to use the moment when porting seems useful as a prompt to consider a more complete upgrade. Anything that needs porting is by its nature legacy, and likely overdue for refactoring and UI updating anyway.

In addition to porting from SC, I've also ported from HC, FileMaker, Visual Basic, and a few others. All cases have ultimately reinforced my opinion:

Given the amount of rework required when doing a port between any two systems, I find the work is more productive when done freshly, with a fresh product focus, by creating a new work that isn't ported from the old one as much as merely inspired by it.
Richard Gaskin
LiveCode development, training, and consulting services: Fourth World Systems
LiveCode Group on Facebook
LiveCode Group on LinkedIn

Post Reply

Return to “Off-Topic”