Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Words [ dictionary/glossary/wiki ] #3

Closed
nelsonic opened this issue May 1, 2015 · 11 comments
Closed

Words [ dictionary/glossary/wiki ] #3

nelsonic opened this issue May 1, 2015 · 11 comments

Comments

@nelsonic
Copy link
Member

nelsonic commented May 1, 2015

_this comment can be edited by contributors_.

This is an alphabetical list of the words we have defined in the _alvo_ vocabulary with an explanation of what the word means (to us), the associated action it accomplishes and an example of its usage.

expect

expect lets us check something on the page.

visit

visit is the simplest word we could think of for instructing a person to visit a particular url.
example:

visit google.com
expect pagehastext "I'm Feeling Lucky"
@nelsonic
Copy link
Member Author

nelsonic commented May 2, 2015

@iteles we are essentially developing our own http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain-specific_language for this project. we need a fantastic name for the _new language_ for the web! 😉

@iteles
Copy link
Member

iteles commented May 3, 2015

This. Is. So. Fun! 🎉 🎈

@nelsonic
Copy link
Member Author

nelsonic commented May 5, 2015

What do you think about using the word _first_ to indicate an task that you "include" (before starting the task you are about to define ... most programming languages have the notion of "include" we need a more human-friendly word)
e.g:

first "login"
visit /new
input #tweet "inventing new dsl for the web!"
click #submit
expect .tweets contains "inventing new dsl"

@iteles

@iteles
Copy link
Member

iteles commented May 5, 2015

Right. "include" and "import" aren't natural for non-programmers.

I like the idea of using then to chain things together:

"login" then
visit /new
...

But we need an 'include' type word. start with is probably more intuitive but too wordy.

@nelsonic
Copy link
Member Author

nelsonic commented May 5, 2015

@nelsonic
Copy link
Member Author

nelsonic commented May 5, 2015

we could use require instead of _first_

@nelsonic
Copy link
Member Author

nelsonic commented May 5, 2015

I really want to keep the vocabulary as simple as possible.
But... in fairness. _require_ might be clearer because it could also do something interesting...
like if there is no _task_ called "login" it could try and find one...

@iteles
Copy link
Member

iteles commented May 5, 2015

And run might be too intimidating for some people...

Yes. require sounds good! We can always change it if we have a flash of inspiration ⚡

@nelsonic
Copy link
Member Author

nelsonic commented May 5, 2015

No... that's the point of a DSL. we are carving the language into _Stone_.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8306631.stm

@iteles
Copy link
Member

iteles commented May 5, 2015

😆 No, I meant in the next few days!!
Might actually be interesting to talk to the relatively inexperienced students coming in on Monday...

@nelsonic
Copy link
Member Author

nelsonic commented Feb 9, 2017

@nelsonic nelsonic closed this as completed Feb 9, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants