Re: proposal: revAppVersion = 0
On 7/20/04 10:53 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote: would there be any harm in having libURL automatically loaded? No harm, really, but it would go against the commitment to not altering the default engine behavior, as posted in previous messages yesterday. The comment made here about standalone confusion is valid, too. If we add libURL loading to the IDE, then don't we have to also add it to the standalone builder? And maybe then we're on a revolutionary slippery slope... ? -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: proposal: revAppVersion = 0
Dave Cragg wrote: At 8:53 pm -0700 20/7/04, Richard Gaskin wrote: But you raise a good point: would there be any harm in having libURL automatically loaded? I can't think of any. Unless someone tells me not to I'm inclined to have it do so I'm not so sure. (There has to be someone. :)) If the IDE automatically loads libUrl (or any other library), there's a tendency to forget to explicitly add a "start using" in your standalones. This could be another slippery slope where the IDE behaves slightly less like the standalones we use it to build. That's why I've always removed the parts of the IDE frontscript that start using libUrl whenever you make a get/post/etc url call. As always, your input is greatly appreciated. I'll make this a preference instead. Though it raises a question: Should the Standalone Builder prompt the user with a reminder when building a stack into which no resources have been moved? I'm not thinking of anything fancy, perhaps just looking for the absence of an Answer Dialog in the stackfile being made into a standalone. Useful? -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Media Corporation ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.FourthWorld.com ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: proposal: revAppVersion = 0
At 8:53 pm -0700 20/7/04, Richard Gaskin wrote: But you raise a good point: would there be any harm in having libURL automatically loaded? I can't think of any. Unless someone tells me not to I'm inclined to have it do so I'm not so sure. (There has to be someone. :)) If the IDE automatically loads libUrl (or any other library), there's a tendency to forget to explicitly add a "start using" in your standalones. This could be another slippery slope where the IDE behaves slightly less like the standalones we use it to build. That's why I've always removed the parts of the IDE frontscript that start using libUrl whenever you make a get/post/etc url call. Cheers Dave ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: proposal: revAppVersion = 0
On 7/20/04 10:06 PM, Chipp Walters wrote: also, I notice libURL doesn't start automatically, but my altPluginsToolbar (and MagicCarpet and other plugins) need it. So, in MC I use in my altPlugin toolbar initMe routine the following: try get libURLVersion() catch tErr start using stack libURL end try Any ideas why this isn't a good thing to do in MC? IOW, would auto-starting libURL affect others? Perhaps I should "ask" for permission? It shouldn't hurt anything. Most of the libURL commands used to be in a common library in MC, until it got so big that they moved it into its own substack. After that, the "new" requirement was that you had to start using it if you needed to. So if your plugins put it in use, you aren't doing anything different than the old IDE did. I don't see any potential problems, I think the library pretty much stays out of the way and behaves itself. That's a long way of saying you don't have to get permission. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: proposal: revAppVersion = 0
Chipp Walters wrote: for what it's worth, I'm doing the following: if there is a stack "revMenuBar" then --IN REV else --IN MC end if LOL - I'd been doing the opposite, checking for "MetaCard Menu Bar". :) also, I notice libURL doesn't start automatically, but my altPluginsToolbar (and MagicCarpet and other plugins) need it. So, in MC I use in my altPlugin toolbar initMe routine the following: try get libURLVersion() catch tErr start using stack libURL end try Any ideas why this isn't a good thing to do in MC? IOW, would auto-starting libURL affect others? Perhaps I should "ask" for permission? Of course now that we have a Plugin Manager with a way to automatically load a stack as a library, one can easily add a plugin for any such initialization needed. But you raise a good point: would there be any harm in having libURL automatically loaded? I can't think of any. Unless someone tells me not to I'm inclined to have it do so -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Media Corporation ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.FourthWorld.com ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: proposal: revAppVersion = 0
for what it's worth, I'm doing the following: if there is a stack "revMenuBar" then --IN REV else --IN MC end if also, I notice libURL doesn't start automatically, but my altPluginsToolbar (and MagicCarpet and other plugins) need it. So, in MC I use in my altPlugin toolbar initMe routine the following: try get libURLVersion() catch tErr start using stack libURL end try Any ideas why this isn't a good thing to do in MC? IOW, would auto-starting libURL affect others? Perhaps I should "ask" for permission? best, Chipp ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: proposal: revAppVersion = 0
Hi Richard, ... So I'm proposing that I add this very simple function the the MC IDE backscript: function revAppVersion return "0" end revAppVersion This function follows the convention established by the qtVersion function, returning a version number if present (this function is available in the Rev IDE) or "0" if not. It's only three lines, and doesn't add any new messages or properties. Shall I add it? Yes, please :-) I made 2 tiny enhancements in my "Stack Components" stack: Added a "lock messages" checkbox in the group "substack" and "cards" and changed the script of the handler "doit" in that stack accordingly... ... if the hilite of btn "lm" then lock messages ... Maybe that could be useful for others, too? And what about "tuning" the ask/answer dialogs a bit? I mean custom icons etc...? Do you think this is difficult/time consuming? I think the calls of these stacks (incl. setting/getting of the dialogdata) is hardcoded in the engine, right? I'd volunteer for that, if you could give me a hint or two ;-) -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Media Corporation Regards Klaus Major [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.major-k.de ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
RE: proposal: revAppVersion = 0
> So I'm proposing that I add this very simple function the the MC IDE > backscript: > > function revAppVersion > return "0" > end revAppVersion It's funny... I had this handler in use three years ago: function STS_IDE try put revAppVersion() into tVersion catch errorVar put the version into tVersion return "MetaCard,"&tVersion exit STS_IDE end try return "Revolution,"&tVersion end STS_IDE Returned to me whether MC was running or Rev, and returned the version accordingly... Ken Ray Sons of Thunder Software Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web Site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/ ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
