date:20110707

Dear LiveCoders,

Last Saturday, 2 July, we had another nice on-line gathering of LiveCode fans. 
This time we had 2 cool presentations by Judy and Chipp. Additionally, we set a 
record as the event was attended by over 30 people! Yay!

Judy started the event with a beginners session. She discussed the creation and 
use of tab buttons and menu buttons. If you have just started using LiveCode, 
then this video is a must-see. (Unfortunately, I don't have the download links 
for Judy's stacks yet; I might add them to the blog later).

You can watch Judy's video here:
http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/15757319

Chipp showed his new altButton droptool and InterfaceDesigner and talked about 
the MagicCarpet AutoUpdate Architecture. All attendants were allowed to 
download a complimentary copy of InterfaceDesigner. At http://qery.us/uh is 
also a free download of altButton available. Thanks Chipp!

You can find Chipp's presentation at
http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/15758078

The European HyperCard User Group (eHUG, http://www.ehug.info) raffled off an 
e-book courtesy of TidBITS. The e-book was won by Steve. You can find more info 
on the TC series at http://www.takecontrolbooks.com.

We are still looking for someone to present this Saturday (9 July)!!! If you 
would like to participate in the event, now or later, please head over to 
http://qery.us/u0 for ideas and contact Mark or Björnke. At http://qery.us/du 
you can find a web form that makes it really easy to contact us. 

I hope to see you all at the event next time. We will be making announcements 
on this mailing list and at http://livecode.tv where you can also find a copy 
of this text. 

--
Best regards,

Mark Schonewille

Economy-x-Talk Consulting and Software Engineering
Homepage: http://economy-x-talk.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/xtalkprogrammer
KvK: 50277553

New: Download the Installer Maker Plugin 1.6 for LiveCode here http://qery.us/ce


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Setting up Mac LiveCode apps on an iPad ?

2011-07-07 Thread Francis Nugent Dixon


Hi from Beautiful Brittany,

When the iPad came out, I thought WOW, with the
idea of carrying my LiveCode apps with me.
Then I found out that (of course), I had to pay for this
facility (OK - Business is Business !).
I don't really want to develop new apps on an iPad,
but move existing LiveCode apps to an iPad (mostly
data-base interrogation and update apps).
I decided to let things drop - I am retired, and I have
limited resources, and above all, I don't want to sell
anything I build. So I am a difficult client to please !
- and, of course, I have to pay for the iPad !

Now I have some questions :

If I pay $99 for iOS functions, can I move my existing
apps to an iPad? (reducing LiveCode windows to iPad
dimensions is my problem, I can do this !).
(in the LiveCode for iOS page, it says FROM JUST $99,
and I have learned to add but usually much more to such
statements. !!
If I can move my apps to an iPad, and I update a file on
the iPad, can I download it back to my Mac ?
(Because some of my external files are big, maybe I
should put them up on my Run-Rev Server).
Assuming Yes to my first questions, what storage
should I choose for the iPad (16, 32, )?
What sort of conversion problems will I encounter ?
(an answer like - none, small or big will suffice !)
What the hell is this Apple Development program ?
If I only develop apps for MY iPad, certainly not interested
in submitting apps to the App Store, must I comply ?
Are there any other nasty surprises waiting for me if
I want to run my Livecode apps on an iPad ?

Thanks for any input (especially positive input !!)

-Francis

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Setting up Mac LiveCode apps on an iPad ?

Hi Francis,

To make apps for your own iPad and keep them running, you need to pay for the 
Apple dev programme every year unfortunately.

In continental Europe, you pay 79 euro + VAT. I believe it is illegal to put 
consumer prices without VAT on a website in Europe, but RunRev still uses 
prices without VAT. The correct price is currently €94,80 for a personal 
license. Such a license allows you to make standalones with a splash screen 
with the RunRev logo, and a message saying something like This app is not for 
distribution.

Sorry for being somewhat negative :-)

--
Best regards,

Mark Schonewille

Economy-x-Talk Consulting and Software Engineering
Homepage: http://economy-x-talk.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/xtalkprogrammer
KvK: 50277553

New: Download the Installer Maker Plugin 1.6 for LiveCode here http://qery.us/ce

On 7 jul 2011, at 14:36, Francis Nugent Dixon wrote:

 Hi from Beautiful Brittany,
 
 When the iPad came out, I thought WOW, with the
 idea of carrying my LiveCode apps with me.
 Then I found out that (of course), I had to pay for this
 facility (OK - Business is Business !).
 I don't really want to develop new apps on an iPad,
 but move existing LiveCode apps to an iPad (mostly
 data-base interrogation and update apps).
 I decided to let things drop - I am retired, and I have
 limited resources, and above all, I don't want to sell
 anything I build. So I am a difficult client to please !
 - and, of course, I have to pay for the iPad !
 
 Now I have some questions :
 
 If I pay $99 for iOS functions, can I move my existing
 apps to an iPad? (reducing LiveCode windows to iPad
 dimensions is my problem, I can do this !).
 (in the LiveCode for iOS page, it says FROM JUST $99,
 and I have learned to add but usually much more to such
 statements. !!
 If I can move my apps to an iPad, and I update a file on
 the iPad, can I download it back to my Mac ?
 (Because some of my external files are big, maybe I
 should put them up on my Run-Rev Server).
 Assuming Yes to my first questions, what storage
 should I choose for the iPad (16, 32, )?
 What sort of conversion problems will I encounter ?
 (an answer like - none, small or big will suffice !)
 What the hell is this Apple Development program ?
 If I only develop apps for MY iPad, certainly not interested
 in submitting apps to the App Store, must I comply ?
 Are there any other nasty surprises waiting for me if
 I want to run my Livecode apps on an iPad ?
 
 Thanks for any input (especially positive input !!)
 
 -Francis



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: defining and using globals in an application

2011-07-07 Thread Richard Gaskin


Mark Stuart wrote:

You HAVE to declare the global again, and again where needed.

I'd rather it once declared and a value put into it, the value be available
elsewhere WITHOUT having to declare it again.


As Jacque pointed out, LC and related dialects are very forgiving with 
the scope of variable names, so it's possible to have one token used as 
a global, a local, and an argument.  To avoid confusing the compiler, we 
need to declare globals in any script that uses them.


If that one line of code at the top of a script is cumbersome (and in 
some complex code bases it may well be), try accessors instead:


-- In a mainstack, library, backscript, or other globally-available
-- script:
global gDefaultWidgetHeight

command SetDefaultWidgetHeight pVal
  put pVal into gDefaultWidgetHeight
end SetDefaultWidgetHeight

function GetDefaultWidgetHeight
   return gDefaultWidgetHeight
end GetDefaultWidgetHeight
---

With those in place you can get and set the value stored in the global 
from any other script without a declaration, e.g.:


  set the height of grp 1 to GetDefaultWidgetHeight()
  SetDefaultWidgetHeight 200

Another benefit to using accessors is that they help factor code; that 
is, you can change how you store that value at any time without having 
to modify any code that relies on it.  Today it might be a global, but 
two versions from now it might be a database record; with accessors, you 
only change two handlers and everything else comes along for the ride.


True, using accessors will impair performance relative to calling the 
global directly.  But in practical terms you're only looking at a 
fraction of a *micro*second, so if you need to liberate your code base 
from direct storage references chances are no one will ever notice the 
performance difference.


--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World
 LiveCode training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com
 Webzine for LiveCode developers: http://www.LiveCodeJournal.com
 LiveCode Journal blog: http://LiveCodejournal.com/blog.irv

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Display prices without VAT/WAS Re: Setting up Mac LiveCode apps on an iPad ?

2011-07-07 Thread Klaus on-rev

Hi Mark and RunRev,

Am 07.07.2011 um 15:35 schrieb Mark Schonewille:

 Hi Francis,
 
 ...
 In continental Europe, you pay 79 euro + VAT. I believe it is illegal to put 
 consumer prices without VAT on a website in Europe, but RunRev still uses 
 prices without VAT.

This is true!

 ...
 --
 Best regards,
 
 Mark Schonewille

Best

Klaus

--
Klaus Major
http://www.major-k.de
kl...@major.on-rev.com


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Gottit!

Well the email isn't coming from him, it's coming from the list server, but
is tagged from him. Some mailing lists do this, and Gmail should really have
some way to detect that, otherwise all mailing lists read through Gmail will
incorrectly mark posts from other Gmail users as possible forgeries.

It's a new feature - I imagine they'll fix that before long.

 ~ Chris Innanen
 ~ Nonsanity
 ~ (Yes, it's really me.)


On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 3:33 PM, stephen barncard 
stephenrevoluti...@barncard.com wrote:

 Richmond, this is off-topic, but I use google mail and your messages are
 being tagged as not being you:

 http://fulton.barncard.com/bugz/richmond.png

 with an explanation from google

 http://mail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?hl=en-GBctx=mailanswer=185812


 Now I don't have to read the headers to know it's really you, but there
 appears to be no It's Really Richmond, honest button.

  I've seen this on a couple of posts from others on this list.



 On 6 July 2011 11:50, Richmond Mathewson richmondmathew...@gmail.com
 wrote:

  --**--**--
 
 
  a.k.a Richmond finally finds the paracetemol
 
  put the selectedChunk into CHUNGK
  select after CHUNGK
 
  Yippee-Doo, Caloo-Caleh, and other foolish noises demonstrating that
 after
  a year I have finally found the cure to a besetting problem.
 
  Thanks Slava and Mark for getting it wrong in such a way that it goaded
 me
  into cracking the thing at least . . .  :)
 
  --**---
 
  This still is useless, as it only functions in the first line of a
  multi-line
  unicodeText field . . .
 
  He who crows like a cockerel is, indeed, a fool
 
  if one uses   put the selectedChunk
 
  there is no value if the cursor lies somewhere in the second or third
 line
  of text
 
  similarly  put the selectedLine  on yields a value [ e.g.  line 1 of
 field
  6] when the
  cursor is somewhere in the first line
 
 
 
  __**_
  use-livecode mailing list
  use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
  Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
  subscription preferences:
  http://lists.runrev.com/**mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
 http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
 



 --



 Stephen Barncard
 San Francisco Ca. USA

 more about sqb  http://www.google.com/profiles/sbarncar
 ___
 use-livecode mailing list
 use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
 Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
 subscription preferences:
 http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: defining and using globals in an application

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:07 AM, Mark Wieder mwie...@ahsoftware.net wrote:

 Once again, no, it doesn't work that way. Global variables are *never*
 out of scope, so you can *not* have global and local variables with
 the same name. Even if the global variable is declared in a different
 script, it's still lurking in memory ready to bite you. You can not
 compile

 global xyzzy

 in one script and then try to compile

 local xyzzy

 in another script.


Actually you can, and I just tested it to be sure. I've got two buttons, one
with global TestVar and a mouseup handler that adds 1 to TextVar then
answers it, and a second button that has local TestVar and does the same
thing.

Clicking each in turn shows that the two values remain independent from each
other. This is because variables defined as global are only in scope if the
environment (usually a script) has defined the same global with the same
name.

A third button with just the mouseup script and no global or local always
displays 1 since the value of the handler-local TestVar is not preserved
from one execution to the next. It isn't automatically getting access to the
global declared in another script. It would have to be declared in each
script that wants to access it.

The message box is a special case where all globals are available to it
without having to explicitly declare them. (But not locals, of course, which
remain in-scope only within the script where they are defined.)

It doesn't bother the environment at all that a global and a local have the
same name, so long as they are defined in different scripts. (Actually, you
can define a local at the top of a script, then define the SAME name as a
global on the next line, and there won't be an error. Though the global line
WILL be ignored. Attempting the same thing in the opposite order results in
a compile error. Go figure...)

I always take a single page from the Hungarian Notation guidelines and put a
lowercase g before all global variable names. That way I always keep in
mind it's global nature, and I can never accidentally reuse the same name as
a local variable and get confused. (Note, only I would be confused by this,
not LiveCode.)

But I rarely use globals these days. I find using custom stack or card
properties work much better for most of the tasks I would have used a global
for. Plus they are preserved from session to session, unlike globals, and
can be made card-specific with the same name if needed.

It basically turns a single named storage location into a multi-named
storage location. Instead of just TestVar it would become TestVar of card
1, etc. Custom properties are far superior to globals in functionality (in
my opinion) and more clear about scope.


Hope that helps,
 ~ Chris Innanen
 ~ Nonsanity
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: defining and using globals in an application

2011-07-07 Thread Francis Nugent Dixon


Hi from Beautiful Brittany,

I think Scott has the right attitude. Use globals
if you need them, Use custom properties if you don't
like the power/scope/limitations of globals.

In addition, I use Do global xyz and delete global xyz
to have rigorous dynamic control over global variables.

During stack development, I often use :

put the globalNames into LVGlobals
do global   LVGlobals

to get the values of all current globals (including
system globals)

Very useful !

-Francis

Nothing should ever be done for the first time !

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: defining and using globals in an application

2011-07-07 Thread Richard Gaskin


Francis Nugent Dixon wrote:


I think Scott has the right attitude. Use globals
if you need them, Use custom properties if you don't
like the power/scope/limitations of globals.


I would respectfully amend that to read:

Use globals if you need them, use custom properties if you need data 
bound persistently to an object, and use accessors for anything else.


Variables are volatile (they go away when the session ends), and that's 
a very useful feature in many cases.  Binding data to objects can cause 
those values to remain with the object if the object is in a stack that 
gets saved.  If you need values to persist between sessions then 
properties may be the best choice, but if you need volatility globals or 
accessors that use globals can be a better fit.


--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World
 LiveCode training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com
 Webzine for LiveCode developers: http://www.LiveCodeJournal.com
 LiveCode Journal blog: http://LiveCodejournal.com/blog.irv

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: defining and using globals in an application

I actually prefer to use custom properties even for values that I want to be
session-specific. The reason being that I'd rather have personal control
over when the value is cleared than leave it to the environment to handle.
This way I can be sure I know the contents of the variable (as a custom
property) at all times. It never gets changed out from under me, and so will
never surprise me or my code.

With globals, you need to handle the case of an empty (unset) value
everywhere the global is used, or you need to initialize the global to a
starting value at startup - The place where it will get emptied at the start
of each session.

Using a custom property, if you need the value to be reset to a particular
value on startup you do it yourself in the OpenCard or PreOpenCard. If you
want it to be emptied like a global, you can do that there too. But at least
you have all the control yourself. No more surprises.

I really only use globals when I'm doing a quick hack script for debugging
purposes, but even there my old Hypercard habits (where globals were the
only option) are being replaced with custom properties.

I really do think of custom properties as the complete replacement, in all
ways, for globals.

(I never did like having those single lines of code (aka global TestVar)
living outside of any handler in my scripts. They were - if I may use the
past tense - an ugly feature of the language too...)

~ Chris Innanen
~ Nonsanity

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Richard Gaskin
ambassa...@fourthworld.comwrote:

Francis Nugent Dixon wrote:

I think Scott has the right attitude. Use globals
if you need them, Use custom properties if you don't
like the power/scope/limitations of globals.

I would respectfully amend that to read:

Use globals if you need them, use custom properties if you need data bound
persistently to an object, and use accessors for anything else.

Variables are volatile (they go away when the session ends), and that's a
very useful feature in many cases. Binding data to objects can cause those
values to remain with the object if the object is in a stack that gets
saved. If you need values to persist between sessions then properties may
be the best choice, but if you need volatility globals or accessors that use
globals can be a better fit.

--
Richard Gaskin
Fourth World
LiveCode training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com
Webzine for LiveCode developers: http://www.LiveCodeJournal.com
LiveCode Journal blog:
http://LiveCodejournal.com/**blog.irvhttp://LiveCodejournal.com/blog.irv

__**_
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/**mailman/listinfo/use-livecodehttp://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

defining and using globals in an application

2011-07-07 Thread Slava Paperno

 (I never did like having those single lines of code (aka global TestVar)
living outside of any handler in my scripts. They were - if I may use the
past tense - an ugly feature of the language too...)

We're all different (well, most of us). I like having a list of all
variables right there, at the top of each handler or script. It's
self-documenting, and the language forces me to maintain a discipline. (But
then I also like to line up the icons on my desktop.)

S.



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

defining and using globals in an application

2011-07-07 Thread Mark Stuart

Hi all,
Well, I didn't expect such a passionate response from a lot of folk
about globals and related containers of variable values.
So point taken about globals. Very interesting ideas and concepts that I
very much appreciate, because I learned something today from y'all.

Stephen - interesting concepts from Andre.
Jerry J - many software development tools allow values of variables to
be passed to other programs, functions, you name it, they are there.
Specifically, the one I use every day - MSE's eDeveloper and their new
version: uniPaaS. They allow the declaration of globals, which the
values can be obtained from anywhere in the entire application.
Jacqueline - are you saying that two different applications (as
executables or as .rev/.livecode stacks) using the same global name can
be referenced by one another, and share the same values? That's bizarre.
Francis - I like the concept. I will give it a go.
Richard - I like your concepts. I'll give it a go.



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: defining and using globals in an application

2011-07-07 Thread Mark Wieder

Chris-

Thursday, July 7, 2011, 7:50:41 AM, you wrote:

 Actually you can, and I just tested it to be sure. I've got two buttons, one
 with global TestVar and a mouseup handler that adds 1 to TextVar then
 answers it, and a second button that has local TestVar and does the same
 thing.

Interesting. I *did* try myself before posting, but I did this in the
same script:

on mouseUp
  global xyzzy
  local xyzzy
end mouseUp

and the compiler properly complains about that. I guess it's not quite
smart enough to catch this across different scripts. I'd file a bug
about this, but since I don't use global vars anyway I don't think
I'll bother.

-- 
-Mark Wieder
 mwie...@ahsoftware.net


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: OpenField and keeping the focus on the field

cannot attach in list.

Bob


On Jul 6, 2011, at 8:35 PM, Slava Paperno wrote:

 Tom,
 
 I attach a stack that does what I think you were trying to do.
 
 Slava
 
 -Original Message-
 From: use-livecode-boun...@lists.runrev.com [mailto:use-livecode-
 boun...@lists.runrev.com] On Behalf Of Tom Johnson
 Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 8:42 PM
 To: LC Questions
 Subject: OpenField and keeping the focus on the field
 
 Hello,
 I'm running into a similar problem as another that's currently on the
 list.
 What I'm trying to do is
 keep the focus on the field where the script below lives. If I do a
 simple
 focus on me or
 something similar it goes into a loop of openField. If there's a way to
 keep
 the focus
 in the field please fill me in. If there's something wrong with my
 approach,
 I'm
 open to suggestions. There other fields and buttons on the card with
 this
 field too. If
 the focus stays in the field the rest of the script does work.
 
 
 Thanks,
 Tom
 
 ___
 use-livecode mailing list
 use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
 Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
 preferences:
 http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: defining and using globals in an application

2011-07-07 Thread Richard Gaskin


Nonsanity wrote:


I actually prefer to use custom properties even for values that I want to be
session-specific. The reason being that I'd rather have personal control
over when the value is cleared than leave it to the environment to handle.
This way I can be sure I know the contents of the variable (as a custom
property) at all times. It never gets changed out from under me, and so will
never surprise me or my code.

With globals, you need to handle the case of an empty (unset) value
everywhere the global is used, or you need to initialize the global to a
starting value at startup - The place where it will get emptied at the start
of each session.

Using a custom property, if you need the value to be reset to a particular
value on startup you do it yourself in the OpenCard or PreOpenCard. If you
want it to be emptied like a global, you can do that there too. But at least
you have all the control yourself. No more surprises.

I really only use globals when I'm doing a quick hack script for debugging
purposes, but even there my old Hypercard habits (where globals were the
only option) are being replaced with custom properties.

I really do think of custom properties as the complete replacement, in all
ways, for globals.


Respectfully, those issues and solutions seem to work both ways.  For 
example, you can set the value of a global on preOpenCard just as easily 
as you can set the value of a property, and any script from anywhere can 
alter a property just as easily as it can alter a global.


For myself, in addition to the persistence issue (I'm a compulsive 
saver) it comes down to simply laziness - I'd rather write:


  SetDefaultWidgetHeight 200

...than:

  set the uDefaultWidgetHeight of button someButton \
of card someCard of stack someStack to 200

Where properties are unbeatable is when you need to bind data to a 
specific object. If you have multiple objects in which each need a 
different value, implementing those as properties is the with-the-grain 
solution.


But if you need something that's global in scope, I see no harm in using 
globals.


From time to time I come across recommendations that globals are 
somehow bad practice, yet almost every language supports them so I'm 
inclined to think they have a place among our options for value storage.


--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World
 LiveCode training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com
 Webzine for LiveCode developers: http://www.LiveCodeJournal.com
 LiveCode Journal blog: http://LiveCodejournal.com/blog.irv

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: defining and using globals in an application

I think you are saying there ought to be something called a stack global, that 
if declared there outside any script, will be available without declaring it in 
any of the substacks scripts. Yes? 

The reason they do things the way they do is so that you do not accidentally 
reference a global that was declared in some other app you are building. Let's 
say you have an accounting stack, and you have an address book stack. You 
decide to incorporate the address book stack into your accounting app instead 
of building a customer stack from scratch. 

In the stack script of both you have a global called vDatabase, which contains 
the name of the database where the data is hosted. Without this kind of scoping 
of variables, you could never be sure that they didn't get confused. 

Bob


On Jul 6, 2011, at 8:29 PM, Mark Stuart wrote:

 Hi Slava,
 
 My point exactly.
 You have to define it again in every stack, or substack you want to use the
 value thereof.
 I define my globals at the top of each stack, outside any script. But only
 those globals I need in that stack.
 
 I think it is unnatural to call it a global and the value of that global
 not be available anywhere else (in other stacks), unless you define that
 global again.
 
 This sets up the scenario of typing the global names incorrectly, or missing
 to define it where needed.
 
 Regards,
 Mark Stuart
 
 
 ___
 use-livecode mailing list
 use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
 Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
 preferences:
 http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: defining and using globals in an application

2011-07-07 Thread J. Landman Gay


On 7/7/11 1:07 AM, Mark Wieder wrote:


Once again, no, it doesn't work that way. Global variables are *never*
out of scope, so you can *not* have global and local variables with
the same name.


You can if you turn off explicitVariables.

--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: defining and using globals in an application

Try custom properties instead. Store your values in a stack property and they 
will be retrievable from anywhere. 

Bob


On Jul 6, 2011, at 9:45 PM, Mark Stuart wrote:

 Hi Slava,
 You wrote:
 
 You said the value of that global not be available anywhere else, but the
 value IS available everywhere else. You just have to declare that this is a
 global variable before using it, so LC knows where to fetch that value.
 
 
 Again, my point exactly.
 You HAVE to declare the global again, and again where needed.
 
 I'd rather it once declared and a value put into it, the value be available
 elsewhere WITHOUT having to declare it again.
 It just sets up the developer for an easy falldown. The time it takes,
 especially for a different developer in the same application or coming back
 some time later, to find the declared global name.
 
 Which brings up a whole new issue of intelli-sense or type-ahead
 variable-name-while-typing-a-script convention.
 But I won't go there at this time.
 
 Regards,
 Mark Stuart
 
 
 ___
 use-livecode mailing list
 use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
 Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
 preferences:
 http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: defining and using globals in an application

2011-07-07 Thread J. Landman Gay


On 7/7/11 10:36 AM, Mark Stuart wrote:


Jacqueline - are you saying that two different applications (as
executables or as .rev/.livecode stacks) using the same global name can
be referenced by one another, and share the same values? That's bizarre.


No, not at all. In your own standalone, globals and all other variables 
belong only to your scripts and it's safe. The conflict arises only if 
you are working with stacks in the IDE. Plugins are a good example, or 
any stacks you download from RevOnline. If one of those uses the same 
global name as a local variable in your own script, you'll get the other 
author's values instead of yours.


It could happen with your own stacks too if you're like many of us and 
tend to use the same names in different stacks for certain things.


--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: defining and using globals in an application

Safe way around this is to delete all your globals upon closing your stack. 

Bob


On Jul 6, 2011, at 10:59 PM, Jerry J wrote:

 Mark,
 
 I have been bitten badly by the fact that globals persist until LC is quit.


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: defining and using globals in an application

I don't think she said that. I think she is talking about in the dev 
environment. Globals are global to Livecode, not just the stack, assuming you 
declare them in the script or handler. Obviously, in an executable, the OS is 
going to firewall each app from the other, unless you make a way for them to 
communicate with each other. 

Bob


On Jul 7, 2011, at 8:36 AM, Mark Stuart wrote:

 Jacqueline - are you saying that two different applications (as
 executables or as .rev/.livecode stacks) using the same global name can
 be referenced by one another, and share the same values? That's bizarre.


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: defining and using globals in an application

I don't think it's a bug IMHO. How can a variable in the same script have 2 
scopes? How would the app know which you were talking about when you used it? 

Bob


On Jul 7, 2011, at 8:38 AM, Mark Wieder wrote:

 Interesting. I *did* try myself before posting, but I did this in the
 same script:
 
 on mouseUp
  global xyzzy
  local xyzzy
 end mouseUp
 
 and the compiler properly complains about that. I guess it's not quite
 smart enough to catch this across different scripts. I'd file a bug
 about this, but since I don't use global vars anyway I don't think
 I'll bother.
 
 -- 
 -Mark Wieder
 mwie...@ahsoftware.net


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: defining and using globals in an application

2011-07-07 Thread stephen barncard

And if one needs to work with multiple namespaces, you can do what Trevor
and some others do -- create several instances of livecode and run them at
the same time. It's said that one can cut and paste objects between
instances.

On 7 July 2011 09:09, Bob Sneidar b...@twft.com wrote:

 I don't think she said that. I think she is talking about in the dev
 environment. Globals are global to Livecode, not just the stack, assuming
 you declare them in the script or handler. Obviously, in an executable, the
 OS is going to firewall each app from the other, unless you make a way for
 them to communicate with each other.

 Bob


 On Jul 7, 2011, at 8:36 AM, Mark Stuart wrote:

  Jacqueline - are you saying that two different applications (as
  executables or as .rev/.livecode stacks) using the same global name can
  be referenced by one another, and share the same values? That's bizarre.



Stephen Barncard
San Francisco Ca. USA

more about sqb  http://www.google.com/profiles/sbarncar
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: defining and using globals in an application

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Bob Sneidar b...@twft.com wrote:

 I don't think it's a bug IMHO. How can a variable in the same script have 2
 scopes? How would the app know which you were talking about when you used
 it?

 Bob



Ah. Variables don't a have scope, they live inside scopes.

A handler has a scope. If you put 5 into x in a handler, that x won't be
accessible from anywhere else. It was defined inside the scope of the
handler.

A script has a scope. If you use local x at the top of the script, then
all handlers in that script have access to that variable, but no other
script does. The handlers in that script are part of its scope.

The whole LiveCode environment has a scope. Any call of global x will add
x to the global scope. The message box lives inside that scope.

But here's the weird part that confuses many people... Even though all other
scripts can be said to be inside the LiveCode scope they do not have
access to the variables in that scope unless the specifically request access
to one by name with the global keyword. Sux to break the pattern, but
there ya go... :)

 ~ Chris Innanen
 ~ Nonsanity
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Setting up Mac LiveCode apps on an iPad ?

2011-07-07 Thread Francis Nugent Dixon


Hi from Beautiful Brittany,

Mark wrote :


To make apps for your own iPad and keep them running,
you need to pay for the Apple dev programme every year
unfortunately.



My bog mindles, Mark.

Are you saying that :

I BUY an iPad (at least $500)
I BUY a software which enables me to install iOS
apps on MY iPad (at least $99)

and then :

I have to PAY 94 euros and change to Apple for the
privilege of running MY OWN program on MY OWN
iPad - EVERY F***ING YEAR ?

Does this mean that Apple knows when I run apps
on my iPad, and that I haven't coughed up my $99 ?

Or can I just ignore this hilarious Apple rule ?

-Francis

Nothing should ever be done for the first time ! 


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Setting up Mac LiveCode apps on an iPad ?

Hi Francis,

No, a personal LiveCode license for iOS is not $99 but €94. This is a BIG 
difference. The European LiveCode license is MUCH more expensive than the 
American LiveCode license.

In addition to this, you have to pay an amount for the Apple Developer 
programme every year. I believe that the current price it $79. It is not a huge 
amount, but it isn't free either and you have to pay for it every year. You 
can't ignore this Apple rule. 

--
Best regards,

Mark Schonewille

Economy-x-Talk Consulting and Software Engineering
Homepage: http://economy-x-talk.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/xtalkprogrammer
KvK: 50277553

New: Download the Installer Maker Plugin 1.6 for LiveCode here http://qery.us/ce

On 7 jul 2011, at 19:09, Francis Nugent Dixon wrote:

 Hi from Beautiful Brittany,
 
 Mark wrote :
 
 To make apps for your own iPad and keep them running,
 you need to pay for the Apple dev programme every year
 unfortunately.
 
 
 My bog mindles, Mark.
 
 Are you saying that :
 
 I BUY an iPad (at least $500)
 I BUY a software which enables me to install iOS
 apps on MY iPad (at least $99)
 
 and then :
 
 I have to PAY 94 euros and change to Apple for the
 privilege of running MY OWN program on MY OWN
 iPad - EVERY F***ING YEAR ?
 
 Does this mean that Apple knows when I run apps
 on my iPad, and that I haven't coughed up my $99 ?
 
 Or can I just ignore this hilarious Apple rule ?
 
 -Francis
 
 Nothing should ever be done for the first time ! 


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Setting up Mac LiveCode apps on an iPad ?