Re: revappversion() | Resolution
Hi all, sorry, this was my fault of course! There was in fact another script that caught the original MC function here on my Mac! In my small palette 2lz2 I have some handlers copied from the revlibrary and that function got copied, too, withouth my knowing so to say :-) Again, sorry for the false alarm! Best Klaus -- Klaus Major kl...@major-k.de http://www.major-k.de ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: revappversion()
Hi Klaus, What does the version return in MC? AFAIK it should return the engine version. -- Best regards, Mark Schonewille Economy-x-Talk Consulting and Software Engineering http://economy-x-talk.com http://www.salery.biz Dutch forum: http://runrev.info/rrforum Please visit http://tinyurl.com/d6ojex and click on Stem --Thank you! On 26 feb 2009, at 18:36, Klaus Major wrote: Hi friends, after reading and answering a mail form Malte (how to distinguish between MC and REV) I checked revappversion() after a very long time (since version 2.9 I think) and was VERY surprised that: answer revappversion() gives me: 2.5.1 2.5.1 ? WTF??? I checked the script of one of the backscripts: button id 1043 of card id 1001 of stack /Applications/MetaCard X/ mctools.mc And there is the correct function: function revAppVersion return 0 end revAppVersion Then I commented this function out and still get NO error but: 2.5.1? Is there something built into the engine since version 3.x? Am I overlooking something obvious? Any hints? Best Klaus -- Klaus Major kl...@major-k.de http://www.major-k.de ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: revappversion()
Klaus, This changed at some point. When MC became Rev, the version was changed to return a version number that is equal for both the engine and the IDE, making revappversion obsolete. Hence the 0 in the MC function. Perhaps you need to supplement the version with a new MC function, e.g. mcVersion? Op 26-feb-2009, om 19:15 heeft Klaus Major het volgende geschreven: Hi Mark, Hi Klaus, What does the version return in MC? 3.0.0 which is correct. AFAIK it should return the engine version. Yes, but that has really nothing to do with revappversion() :-) -- Best regards, Mark Schonewille Regards Klaus -- Klaus Major kl...@major-k.de http://www.major-k.de ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: revappversion()
Hi Mark, Klaus, This changed at some point. When did it change, that is the question! This has been working fine until at least engine 2.9! When MC became Rev, the version was changed to return a version number that is equal for both the engine and the IDE, making revappversion obsolete. But revappversion() is still working in Rev. Maybe they mapped this function to the version? Hence the 0 in the MC function. But it does NOT return 0 in MetaCard, so where the heck is 2.5.1 coming from? Perhaps you need to supplement the version with a new MC function, e.g. mcVersion? We added revappversion() to MC some time in the past to be compatible with Rev and to distinguish between the two IDEs. Any opinions/insights, fellow MetaCarders? Best Klaus -- Klaus Major kl...@major-k.de http://www.major-k.de ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: revappversion()
Hi all, just checked the Rev doc about revappversion(): ... The revAppVersion function is different from the version function! ... revappversion() = IDE the version = engine So there is something else going on... Best Klaus -- Klaus Major kl...@major-k.de http://www.major-k.de ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: revappversion()
Hi Klaus, It looks like the docs need to be updated. -- Best regards, Mark Schonewille Economy-x-Talk Consulting and Software Engineering http://economy-x-talk.com http://www.salery.biz Dutch forum: http://runrev.info/rrforum Please visit http://tinyurl.com/d6ojex and click on Stem --Thank you! On 26 feb 2009, at 19:33, Klaus Major wrote: Hi all, just checked the Rev doc about revappversion(): ... The revAppVersion function is different from the version function! ... revappversion() = IDE the version = engine So there is something else going on... Best Klaus -- Klaus Major kl...@major-k.de http://www.major-k.de ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: revappversion()
Mark Schonewille wrote: Hi Klaus, It looks like the docs need to be updated. It still responds correctly for me in Rev. I get 3.0.0 in Rev, and 0 in MC. I hope it doesn't change, because I use it a lot of stacks. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: revappversion()
Klaus Major wrote: Hi friends, after reading and answering a mail form Malte (how to distinguish between MC and REV) I checked revappversion() after a very long time (since version 2.9 I think) and was VERY surprised that: answer revappversion() gives me: 2.5.1 2.5.1 ? WTF??? I'm using the Rev 3.0 engine with the MC IDE 3.0 (Nov 2008) and I get back 0 as expected. So, something on your side? -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: revappversion()
Hi Jacque, It changed already and this change shouldn't affect your projects, as revAppVersion() and the version now return the same number. -- Best regards, Mark Schonewille Economy-x-Talk Consulting and Software Engineering http://economy-x-talk.com http://www.salery.biz Dutch forum: http://runrev.info/rrforum Please visit http://tinyurl.com/d6ojex and click on Stem --Thank you! On 26 feb 2009, at 19:49, J. Landman Gay wrote: It still responds correctly for me in Rev. I get 3.0.0 in Rev, and 0 in MC. I hope it doesn't change, because I use it a lot of stacks. ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: revappversion()
Hi Jacqueline, Mark Schonewille wrote: Hi Klaus, It looks like the docs need to be updated. It still responds correctly for me in Rev. I get 3.0.0 in Rev, and 0 in MC. I just downloaded a fresh mctools stack from the Yahoo MC group and still get 2.5.1? Am I cursed again? :-) Best Klaus -- Klaus Major kl...@major-k.de http://www.major-k.de ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: revappversion()
Klaus, I checked on my copies of MC 2.8.1, 2.9 and 3.9 and revappversion() returns 0 May be you should check the scripts in your Home stack? Tariel ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: revappversion()
Hi Tariel, Klaus, I checked on my copies of MC 2.8.1, 2.9 and 3.9 and revappversion() returns 0 May be you should check the scripts in your Home stack? Been there, done that, nada... Tariel Best Klaus -- Klaus Major kl...@major-k.de http://www.major-k.de ___ metacard mailing list metacard@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: revAppVersion = 0
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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? Seems a useful function to me, although it would of course break under earlier versions of mc which would still require a longer test handler. Useful enhancements are good reasons to stay current. :) Not to mention the bug fixes that will go into this next build btw does the environment() still return 'player' when running XPpro in the development IDE? Don't know, but if it does please report it to Bugzilla. -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Media Corporation ___ Rev tools and more: http://www.fourthworld.com/rev ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: revAppVersion = 0
On 7/19/04 7:26 PM, Wouter wrote: proposal: revAppVersion = 0 Richard Gaskin ambassador at fourthworld.com Mon Jul 19 17:39:49 EDT 2004 As I've written here before, in general I have no interest in adding Rev glue routines to the IDE. We choose to work in MC when we want only built-in messages and built-in properties, and anything not in the engine is of our own making, completely under our control. That said, it occurs to me that it's difficult for a script to determine whether it's running in the Rev IDE or the MC IDE, which may be especially useful when making plugins for use in both. Determining running in the Rev IDE or in the MC IDE is easy. put license.rev is in the effective filename of stack home into tRunningRev or if license.rev is in the effective filename of stack home then ... I do it the other way around: if metacard menu bar is in the openstacks then... But I don't see any reason not to add the single-line function that Richard suggests. It's okay with me either way. Of course, the Pure Transcript approach will avoid that altogether: know the engine, trust the engine, use the engine, and all will always work everywhere. But for folks that work in both from time to time there may be useful reasons for using some Rev libraries, and if so there should be a simple and reliable way to determine whether the Rev IDE is present. 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? -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Media Corporation By all means do. Greetings, WA ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: revAppVersion = 0
Seems a useful function to me, although it would of course break under earlier versions of mc which would still require a longer test handler. btw does the environment() still return 'player' when running XPpro in the development IDE? /H Richardwrites: So I'm proposing that I add this very simple function the the MC IDE backscript:function revAppVersion return "0"end revAppVersionThis 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? ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
