[X-Unix] Hiding apps from the command line

[Kirk McElhearn]

On 3/26/04 5:05 PM, "Simon Forster" <simon-lists at ldml.com> wrote:

>>> The error seems to get thrown if the second command line arg is not
>>> given - whether it's needed or not.
>> 
>> I still get it, even if I add another argument.
> 
> What error? "syntax error: No user interaction allowed. (-1713)"?

Yes. It doesn't break the script, but it is inelegant.
> 
>>> # hide -x           - shows terminal
>> 
>> Why? Since you're typing this from Terminal, it shouldn't matter.
> 
> If I'm in the terminal and want to hide all apps except Mail but still
> keep terminal showing, hide -ox Mail does this for me. Though it'd
> probably be better to just allow you to specify multiple arguments for
> the -o command.
> 
> I'd decided to change the script so the commands were additive -
> although most of them are mutually exclusive so it was a waste of time
> - until I added the -x switch.

Right, that's a point.
> 
>> I wonder if the "begins with" and "contains" is any better/faster than
>> simply "is -o" etc.?
> 
> Additive switches.
> 
>>> if "$1" contains "x" then tell application "Terminal" to activate
>>> else if exists application process "$1" then
>>> set visible of application process "$1" to false
>> 
>> This part's not working for me...
> 
> Hmm. Once again I need to supply 2 arguments. hide Mail Mail for
> example works (for me).

So how can we get it to work if two args are not supplied? That's a waste...
It has something to do with the tell Finder bit.

 
Kirk
 
        My latest book: How to Do Everything with Mac OS X Panther
                  http://www.mcelhearn.com/htde.html
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
 . . . . . . .  kirk at mcelhearn.com | http://www.mcelhearn.com  . . . . . .
 . .  Kirk McElhearn | Chemin de la Lauze | 05600 Guillestre | France  . .