Re: Player Object in HTML 5?

[Peter TB Brett]

Hi Peter,

On 18/12/2015 02:21, Peter Bogdanoff wrote:

I was messing with the HTML 5 Create Standalone in my project today. I got it 
to load in Safari from my local drive and I could change cards and see graphics 
load, objects hide and show, etc. It’s great!


I'm really glad that your experiments are going well!


My player control, however, would not load a remote audio file. Are player 
objects implemented yet? And even more important for me, are callbacks based on 
millisecond timers going to work?


The player control isn't yet supported in the HTML5 engine.  I believe 
it will be possible to get it to work, probably, but unfortunately I 
don't expect to have enough development time to get it working before 
LiveCode 8.0 release.


Very short interval timers can't be made to work reliably in JavaScript, 
as far as I know.  As I understand it (supported by the experiments I've 
done), browsers have an internal rendering framerate (usually aiming for 
whatever your monitor refresh rate is), and check & run JavaScript 
timers at each frame.  On the bright side, that should work just fine 
for animation purposes!


Peter

--
Dr Peter Brett 
LiveCode Open Source Team

LiveCode on reddit: https://reddit.com/r/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: Player Object in HTML 5?

[Peter Bogdanoff]

When I said "millisecond," I meant precision to a millisecond. Otherwise timers 
would be a second or two or longer. That is possible?

And will the commercial versions of LiveCode be able to create the HTML5 
standalones?

> On Dec 18, 2015, at 12:55 AM, Peter TB Brett  wrote:
> 
> Hi Peter,
> 
>> On 18/12/2015 02:21, Peter Bogdanoff wrote:
>> I was messing with the HTML 5 Create Standalone in my project today. I got 
>> it to load in Safari from my local drive and I could change cards and see 
>> graphics load, objects hide and show, etc. It’s great!
> 
> I'm really glad that your experiments are going well!
> 
>> My player control, however, would not load a remote audio file. Are player 
>> objects implemented yet? And even more important for me, are callbacks based 
>> on millisecond timers going to work?
> 
> The player control isn't yet supported in the HTML5 engine.  I believe it 
> will be possible to get it to work, probably, but unfortunately I don't 
> expect to have enough development time to get it working before LiveCode 8.0 
> release.
> 
> Very short interval timers can't be made to work reliably in JavaScript, as 
> far as I know.  As I understand it (supported by the experiments I've done), 
> browsers have an internal rendering framerate (usually aiming for whatever 
> your monitor refresh rate is), and check & run JavaScript timers at each 
> frame.  On the bright side, that should work just fine for animation purposes!
> 
>Peter
> 
> -- 
> Dr Peter Brett 
> LiveCode Open Source Team
> 
> LiveCode on reddit: https://reddit.com/r/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

___
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: Player Object in HTML 5?

[Peter TB Brett]

On 18/12/2015 10:34, Peter Bogdanoff wrote:

When I said "millisecond," I meant precision to a millisecond. Otherwise timers 
would be a second or two or longer. That is possible?


No, you won't get precision to a millisecond.  With most browsers, you 
will get precision to the nearest frame timing (so an error of at least 
9 ms, roughly).



And will the commercial versions of LiveCode be able to create the HTML5 
standalones?


Yes, you can already deploy a commercial HTML5 standalone from Indy or 
Business edition, if you have the HTML5 deployment entitlement added on 
to your license.


  Peter

--
Dr Peter Brett 
LiveCode Open Source Team

LiveCode on reddit: https://reddit.com/r/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: Player Object in HTML 5?

[Mark Waddingham]

On 2015-12-18 11:34, Peter Bogdanoff wrote:

When I said "millisecond," I meant precision to a millisecond.
Otherwise timers would be a second or two or longer. That is possible?


I would be very surprised if you need millisecond precision for anything 
UI related - just a guarantee that your timers will trigger in order at 
the closest time they can to your requested time (which is no different 
than you get in the Desktop engines).


People with the very best eyesight *might* be able to detect changes at 
60fps, but mostly it is 15-40fps I believe. So I suspect an error in the 
region of +/-20ms would not be noticeable in any use-case involving 
sound playback being tied to visual feedback.


Warmest Regards,

Mark.

--
Mark Waddingham ~ m...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/
LiveCode: Everyone can create apps

___
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

EXC_CORPSE_NOTIFY and El Capitan

[Ben Rubinstein]

Since I 'up'graded to El Capitan (OS X 10.11.1) I've been getting an awful lot 
of LiveCode quit unexpectedly, with the report namechecking the sinister 
sounding Exception Note "EXC_CORPSE_NOTIFY".


This is happening with LC 6.6.2, 6.7.7, 7.1.1, and various 7.1.1 rcs.

It generally (always?) happens when LC is in the background, and not in theory 
doing anything.


Since I moved to ElCap, I've seen one other app crash in this way; LC has 
crashed over a dozen times.  Admittedly, that may reflect how much time I 
spend in LC, or at least with it open.


Have other people experienced the same issue?  (I can't see anything in the 
LQCC.)

Ben









___
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: EXC_CORPSE_NOTIFY and El Capitan

[Mark Waddingham]

Hi Ben,

On 2015-12-18 11:57, Ben Rubinstein wrote:

Since I 'up'graded to El Capitan (OS X 10.11.1) I've been getting an
awful lot of LiveCode quit unexpectedly, with the report namechecking
the sinister sounding Exception Note "EXC_CORPSE_NOTIFY".

This is happening with LC 6.6.2, 6.7.7, 7.1.1, and various 7.1.1 rcs.

It generally (always?) happens when LC is in the background, and not
in theory doing anything.

Since I moved to ElCap, I've seen one other app crash in this way; LC
has crashed over a dozen times.  Admittedly, that may reflect how much
time I spend in LC, or at least with it open.

Have other people experienced the same issue?  (I can't see anything
in the LQCC.)


I did a quick google on this - from what I can see CORPSE_NOTIFY usually 
goes along with a normal 'crash' (e.g. bad access, abort etc.)


Could you file a report with the crash logs you are getting so we can 
take a look?


Thanks in advance,

Mark.

--
Mark Waddingham ~ m...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/
LiveCode: Everyone can create apps

___
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: Ineffective backGroundColor

[Mark Waddingham]

Hi Richmond,

On 2015-12-16 20:33, Richmond wrote:

On 16/12/15 20:49, Richmond wrote:
Why, if I set the backGroundColor of an object using a 3 number code 
(RGB)

am I able to do a:

put the backGroundColor and get those 3 values,

while if I set the backGroundColor of an object using a colorName
am I UNABLE to get the RGB values using a:

put the backGroundColor ???


The 'color' properties of controls remember whether you set them to a 
named color, or to an RGB triple.



what is the point of the 'effective' in

effective backgroundColor


If a control's *color property is empty it will inherit from the first 
non-empty ancestor. Using effective means you see the concrete value. 
e.g.


  group 1 -- backgroundColor == red
field 1 -- empty backgroundColor

  put the backgroundColor of field 1 -- empty
  put the backgroundColor of group 1 -- red
  put the effective backgroundColor of field 1 -- red

Um: set the backgroundPixel of someObject to the backgroundPixel of 
someObject


boy-O-boy: was somebody feeling bloody-minded the day that 'thing' was
implemented :)


Getting the backgroundPixel will encode any named color as RGB values, 
and setting the backgroundPixel will end up setting the backgroundColor 
to a non-named color with the derived RGB tripe - which is why you can 
use that line of code to convert named colors to their RGB counterparts.


Of course, one could argue there should be a more obvious way :)

Warmest Regards,

Mark.

--
Mark Waddingham ~ m...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/
LiveCode: Everyone can create apps

___
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: Need help with my C to LiveCode skill

[Todd Fabacher]

Thanks Everyone for the help. My problem I have is that there is an online
Database that the mobile needs to search 20,000 users in the DB. Plus it is
shared with a Legacy system, so no other option as I can't choose
the algorithm.  bitXor did the trick.

Seasons Greetings to All and 2016 is going to be a GREAT LiveCode tear!!!

--Todd


Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 08:46:35 -0500
From: Mike Kerner 
To: How to use LiveCode 
Subject: Re: Need help with my C to LiveCode skills
Message-ID:

Re: Player Object in HTML 5?

[[-hh]]

> On 2015-12-18 11:34, Peter Bogdanoff wrote:
> > When I said "millisecond," I meant precision to a millisecond. 
> > Otherwise timers would be a second or two or longer. That is possible?
> 
> I would be very surprised if you need millisecond precision for anything UI 
> related - just a guarantee that your timers will trigger in order at the 
> closest time they can to your requested time (which is no different than you 
> get in the Desktop engines). People with the very best eyesight *might* be 
> able to detect changes at 60fps, but mostly it is 15-40fps I believe. So I 
> suspect an error in the region of +/-20ms would not be noticeable in any 
> use-case involving sound playback being tied to visual feedback. Warmest 
> Regards, Mark.

I would like to second this.
Time measurements on screen displays below 1 tick (=1/60 second) are said to be 
pretty good random generators. But I heard of people that even believe in 
'exactness' of data < 1 tick, measured on a Raspberry Pi (which doesn't even 
have a hardware clock).

TMHO, there are easier ways to interpret randomness ...
___
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: Player Object in HTML 5?

[David Bovill]

Peter what would be the best way - now or in the future to create the
controller and interactivity in an HTML 5 exported app, and use standard
HTML video elements to play the video?

On Friday, 18 December 2015, Peter TB Brett 
wrote:

> Hi Peter,
>
> On 18/12/2015 02:21, Peter Bogdanoff wrote:
>
>> I was messing with the HTML 5 Create Standalone in my project today. I
>> got it to load in Safari from my local drive and I could change cards and
>> see graphics load, objects hide and show, etc. It’s great!
>>
>
> I'm really glad that your experiments are going well!
>
> My player control, however, would not load a remote audio file. Are player
>> objects implemented yet? And even more important for me, are callbacks
>> based on millisecond timers going to work?
>>
>
> The player control isn't yet supported in the HTML5 engine.  I believe it
> will be possible to get it to work, probably, but unfortunately I don't
> expect to have enough development time to get it working before LiveCode
> 8.0 release.
>
> Very short interval timers can't be made to work reliably in JavaScript,
> as far as I know.  As I understand it (supported by the experiments I've
> done), browsers have an internal rendering framerate (usually aiming for
> whatever your monitor refresh rate is), and check & run JavaScript timers
> at each frame.  On the bright side, that should work just fine for
> animation purposes!
>
> Peter
>
> --
> Dr Peter Brett 
> LiveCode Open Source Team
>
> LiveCode on reddit: https://reddit.com/r/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
>
___
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: Player Object in HTML 5?

[Peter TB Brett]

On 18/12/2015 12:06, David Bovill wrote:

Peter what would be the best way - now or in the future to create the
controller and interactivity in an HTML 5 exported app, and use standard
HTML video elements to play the video?


I'm really sorry to disappoint you, David, but I haven't had the 
opportunity to investigate this yet!  Does anyone else have any suggestions?


I think after LiveCode 8 is released, one of the things planned as an 
enhancement to LiveCode Builder is the possibility of calling JavaScript 
functions directly from LiveCode extensions.  That might provide a good 
avenue!


Also, I really would like to make the player control "Just Work", even 
if only for quite specific values of "work".


   Peter


--
Dr Peter Brett 
LiveCode Open Source Team

LiveCode on reddit: https://reddit.com/r/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: Player Object in HTML 5?

[Colin Holgate]

It’s worth noting that Peter does musical applications. I suspect he wants his 
drums to be on time, and not that he’s expecting Superman to be using his UI.
___
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: Player Object in HTML 5?

[Martin Koob]

I am also interested in being able to have a player object in HTML 5 with
callbacks and am excited to see that this is on the roadmap.  Hopefully that
can be done fairly soon after the release of LC 8.0.

As far as precision I am syncing video to video so I don't need precision to
the millisecond just to nearest frame of video.  So if a callback is
triggered at the right time and has the correct interval value as is in the
callback list as the callback messages parameter but is slightly late in
arriving I think it would be OK for my purposes.

Martin Koob






--
View this message in context: 
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Player-Object-in-HTML-5-tp4699644p4699658.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.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: Player Object in HTML 5?

[Peter Bogdanoff]

9 ms for me is very good. I would be most happy with that!

> On Dec 18, 2015, at 2:48 AM, Peter TB Brett  wrote:
> 
>> On 18/12/2015 10:34, Peter Bogdanoff wrote:
>> When I said "millisecond," I meant precision to a millisecond. Otherwise 
>> timers would be a second or two or longer. That is possible?
> 
> No, you won't get precision to a millisecond.  With most browsers, you will 
> get precision to the nearest frame timing (so an error of at least 9 ms, 
> roughly).
> 
>> And will the commercial versions of LiveCode be able to create the HTML5 
>> standalones?
> 
> Yes, you can already deploy a commercial HTML5 standalone from Indy or 
> Business edition, if you have the HTML5 deployment entitlement added on to 
> your license.
> 
>  Peter
> 
> -- 
> Dr Peter Brett 
> LiveCode Open Source Team
> 
> LiveCode on reddit: https://reddit.com/r/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

___
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: Licensing issues [was: Re: LC 8 DP 11]

[sanke]

On Mon, 14 Dec 2015 11:35:50 Mark Waddingham  wrote
in response to Peter Brett:

 


On 2015-12-14 11:21, Peter TB Brett wrote:
Hi Wilhelm,

I find this newly installed monitoring process controlling the
validity
of older, but already fully installed versions an outright
unnnecessary
nuisance. Is this part of the new licensing policies that restrict the
use of  LC-Indy versions to the license span you have paid for? I have
got a commercial version extending until August 2016, which - as I
understand it - enables me to use (and produce standalones) with this
commercial version even beyond August 2016.

I'm afraid that that's not correct -- when your current commercial
license expires in August 2016, you will not be able to use any
commercial version of LiveCode or use them to create standalones
unless you renew your license.

This isn't quite correct - it depends on the type of commercial license
you received for each LiveCode version you have bought in the past. All
licensing issues are best dealt with by contactingsupp...@livecode.com  
- so please use that channel in future rather than the mailing list.


Up until the subscription model style license was introduced, the
LiveCode Commercial License was perpetual per version. i.e. If you had a
license for a particular version when it was released you can continue
to use it forever. Since the subcription model style license was
introduced, there are no (new) perpetual licenses - your right to use a
commercial version of LiveCode which you have received under the new
style license ceases as soon as that license lapses.



Hi Peter and Mark,

There we have two different views on this problem from two members of 
the Livecode team, and I am inclined to judge that Mark is fully right here.


I aquired my present "perpetual" commercial license in 2012 - valid 
until August 2013 -, which was then prolonged until August 15, 2016,  
because of my contributions to the Kickstarter campaign in 2013.


Today I asked Kevin to clarify this issue, writing
Another related question needs to be clarified from your side. To my 
knowledge (and we had  a general conversation about this on the lists 
some time ago)


1. a once purchased commercial version allowed to produce standalones 
even after the point in time the license had "expired". and


2.  of course it did not allow - this was never questioned - to get 
updates and upgrades after the expiration date


This is common practice for other software producers as well (as 
examples: Photoshop, PaintshopPro, Dreamweaver etc.)  even if they 
have meanwhile changed the rules for "new" licenses. Adobe has also 
switched to a "subscription" model, but the previously bought and 
licensed versions can of course continued to be used forever.


In the light of these legal conditions I think that the information in 
the Livecode FAQ


(URL: 
_https://livecode.com/products/livecode-platform/pricing/ 
_


"Can I continue to build closed source apps if my Commercial license 
expires?"


needs to be corrected to that effect that the respective FAQ-text only 
applies to *newly* bought "Commercial"  (or Indy and Business) licenses.


I hope very much I get an answer from Kevin that confirms Mark's view.

Another question I asked Kevin were the terms of use for my new 
Indy-license, which starts on August 16, 2016, and is valid until August 
15, 2018. I wrote:


I am used to have Livecode available for development both at home and 
office, and additionally on a laptop when traveling, and such a work 
environment is essential for me.


The least I expect from the side of Livecode is that my present 
commercial license until August 15, 2016, and its conditions are 
respected. I would be forced to think about how to proceed in case the 
Indy-license only allows Livecode to be installed on only one 
computer. My decision in such a situation would not exclude the 
possibility to revoke my added Indy license (I think you would be so 
nice to "refund" me) and look for other development tools for my 
further work and intentions.




I surely cannot afford the present Business license, but could live with 
a new Indy-license starting August 2016, provided the Indy license 
allows me to install Livecode - and different versions of it - more than 
one time on one or more computers. If this condition cannot be met 
(along with the possibility to perpetually use a kind of commercial 
available until August 15, 2016) I feel forced to end my long-time 
relationship of about 20 years with  Hypercard, Metacard, Revolution, 
and Livecode, which indeed was a valuable part of my professional work 
and private interests.


I think the focus of any new marketing strategy should first be to 
produce and deliver a stable product and only then think about 
increasing  profits, but thereby avoiding to impose severe restrictions 
on longtime and loyal supporters.



Best regards,

Wilhelm 

Take a look back through 2015

[Steven Crighton]

There was a lot of code written, and plenty tea to keep us fueled.

 

Take a look back through 2015 here - https://livecode.com/our-2015/

 

Enjoy

 

Happy Holidays everyone

 

Steven



 

 

 

 

___
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: EXC_CORPSE_NOTIFY and El Capitan

[Ben Rubinstein]

On 18/12/2015 11:09, Mark Waddingham wrote:

Could you file a report with the crash logs you are getting so we can take a
look?


Done, #16627 has 26 crash logs attached.

thanks,

Ben

___
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: Take a look back through 2015

[Colin Holgate]

Do you get to 198 countries by counting Scotland and Edinburgh as their own 
countries?


> On Dec 18, 2015, at 12:55 PM, Steven Crighton  
> wrote:
> 
> There was a lot of code written, and plenty tea to keep us fueled.
> 
> 
> 
> Take a look back through 2015 here - https://livecode.com/our-2015/
> 
> 
> 
> Enjoy
> 
> 
> 
> Happy Holidays everyone
> 
> 
> 
> Steven
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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

Happy Christmas! Also, FOSDEM 2016.

[Peter TB Brett]

Hey all,

Most of the core development team here at LiveCode Ltd. are off for our 
Christmas holidays from today.  We wish you all the best for the 
Christmas break, and we're looking forward to more LiveCode fun in 2016!


Normal code-wrangling activities will resume on Tuesday 5th January 
2016.  However, if all goes to plan, you should receive the Christmas 
gift of an 8.0.0-dp-12 build early next week!


Thank you so much for the feedback on the release notes.  I've taken all 
of the responses I've received and rolled them into a new release notes 
format for 8.0.0-dp-12.  (I'm afraid they're still PDF-only; HTML notes 
are still to come).


---

As I've previously mentioned, I'll be at FOSDEM 2016 in Brussels on 
29th-31st January 2016, and I'd be really keen to meet up with any 
European LiveCoders who can come along!  If there's enough interest, I 
will organise a social event for the evening of 30th January.  Please 
let me know if you're interested ASAP.


Peter

--
Dr Peter Brett 
LiveCode Open Source Team

LiveCode on reddit: https://reddit.com/r/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: Take a look back through 2015

[Trevor DeVore]

On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Steven Crighton <
steven.crigh...@livecode.com> wrote:

> There was a lot of code written, and plenty tea to keep us fueled.
>
> Take a look back through 2015 here - https://livecode.com/our-2015/


That is a great post Steven! What a productive bunch you have been :-)

-- 
Trevor DeVore
ScreenSteps
www.screensteps.com-www.clarify-it.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: Licensing issues [was: Re: LC 8 DP 11]

[Richard Gaskin]

Wilhelm Sanke wrote:
> I surely cannot afford the present Business license, but could live
> with a new Indy-license starting August 2016, provided the Indy
> license allows me to install Livecode - and different versions of it
> - more than one time on one or more computers.

Looks like section 1.d) of the Indy EULA has you covered:

  d) The Licensed Edition may be used exclusively by You on a
  reasonable number of machines and platforms You may have for
  Your own exclusive use and may not be transferred to, or
  loaned to, or used by another entity at any time or for any
  purpose.

--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
 
 ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.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: Happy Christmas! Also, FOSDEM 2016.

[Trevor DeVore]

On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Peter TB Brett 
wrote:

> Most of the core development team here at LiveCode Ltd. are off for our
> Christmas holidays from today.  We wish you all the best for the Christmas
> break, and we're looking forward to more LiveCode fun in 2016!
>
> Normal code-wrangling activities will resume on Tuesday 5th January 2016.
> However, if all goes to plan, you should receive the Christmas gift of an
> 8.0.0-dp-12 build early next week!
>

Merry Christmas to you and the team as well Peter. I, for one, have been
very pleased with the hard work you've all done and the direction the
LiveCode project is headed! Having a relaxing break.

-- 
Trevor DeVore
ScreenSteps
www.screensteps.com-www.clarify-it.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: Take a look back through 2015

[EED-wp Email]

+1 I'm really excited to see V8 at full potential! Great work so far. 
Bill

William Prothero
http://ed.earthednet.org

> On Dec 18, 2015, at 9:55 AM, Steven Crighton  
> wrote:
> 
> There was a lot of code written, and plenty tea to keep us fueled.
> 
> 
> 
> Take a look back through 2015 here - https://livecode.com/our-2015/
> 
> 
> 
> Enjoy
> 
> 
> 
> Happy Holidays everyone
> 
> 
> 
> Steven
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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: Take a look back through 2015

[Richard Gaskin]

Mark Wieder wrote:
> Yeah, that's an impressive list.
>
> But "3.5x Faster" than what?
> It's like those ads that feature "20% less fat"
>
> Nice to see that kilted Kevin has a glass of scotch close at hand

I dunno, the performance boost seems reasonably well reflected in my 
most recent benchmarks:



--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
 
 ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.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: Take a look back through 2015

[Mark Wieder]

On 12/18/2015 03:03 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote:

Mark Wieder wrote:
 > Yeah, that's an impressive list.
 >
 > But "3.5x Faster" than what?
 > It's like those ads that feature "20% less fat"
 >
 > Nice to see that kilted Kevin has a glass of scotch close at hand

I dunno, the performance boost seems reasonably well reflected in my
most recent benchmarks:




No question about that. Just amused by the wording.

--
 Mark Wieder
 ahsoftw...@gmail.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: Take a look back through 2015

[[-hh]]

> Mark Wie. wrote:
> But "3.5x Faster" than what?
> It's like those ads that feature "20% less fat"

:-)

But: If oldWeight is 3.5*newWeight then newWeight is 1/3.5 of oldWeight what is
71.43% less fat (or whatever).

> Richard G. wrote:
> I dunno, the performance boost seems reasonably well reflected in my 
> most recent benchmarks.

Honestly, how do you conclude the factor 3.5 from these results? Must be an 
exact calculation because of the decimal. Kind of special weighted geometric 
mean?

Here are your results in one list, if anybody would like to do his own 
computations.

-- item1 = 6.7.1-rc2, 2 = 7.0.1-rc2, 3=8.0.0-dp11
Test_ArrayAccess: 19,48,27
Test_ArraySplit: 35,75,57
Test_BuildFilePath: 0,22,14 <-- Take here 1 instead of 0
Test_BuildList: 72,197,98
Test_DecodeArray: 46,79,63
Test_EncodeArray: 9,58,42
Test_FileBinRead: 1,14,14
Test_FileBinWrite: 2,80,78
Test_FileTextRead: 1,156,77
Test_FileTextWrite: 2,96,94
Test_LineAccessByNumber: 518,4684,319
Test_LineAccessForEach: 8,41,17
Test_Lineoffset: 2544,7568,2521
Test_Merge: 220,620,349

[With equal weights one would have:
The average factor of 7.0.1/8.0.0 is around 1.8
(that is "45% less fat" would be comparable)
the average factor of 6.7.1/8.0.0 is around 0.2
(that is "500% more fat" would be comparable)]


___
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: Take a look back through 2015

[Richard Gaskin]

Trevor DeVore wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Steven Crighton <
> steven.crighton at livecode.com> wrote:
>
>> There was a lot of code written, and plenty tea to keep us fueled.
>>
>> Take a look back through 2015 here - https://livecode.com/our-2015/
>
> That is a great post Steven! What a productive bunch you have been :-)

Ditto.

And especially nice to see such a disproportionately favorable number of 
Linux devs using LC:



--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
 
 ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.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: Take a look back through 2015

[Mark Wieder]

On 12/18/2015 09:55 AM, Steven Crighton wrote:

There was a lot of code written, and plenty tea to keep us fueled.



Take a look back through 2015 here - https://livecode.com/our-2015/


Yeah, that's an impressive list.

But "3.5x Faster" than what?
It's like those ads that feature "20% less fat"

Nice to see that kilted Kevin has a glass of scotch close at hand

--
 Mark Wieder
 ahsoftw...@gmail.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: Player Object in HTML 5?

[Simon]

Peter TB Brett wrote
> Yes, you can already deploy a commercial HTML5 standalone from Indy or 
> Business edition, if you have the HTML5 deployment entitlement added on 
> to your license.   

Ahhh shoot!
How did I miss that?  $2K a year.
While I'm not very bothered by HTML5 and LiveCode Indy/Business as I can use
the Community version, I am surprised that I hadn't seen that it was coming
out as an add-on.

Oh well.
Simon



--
View this message in context: 
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Player-Object-in-HTML-5-tp4699644p4699676.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.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: Take a look back through 2015

[Mark Wieder]

On 12/18/2015 06:02 PM, [-hh] wrote:


[With equal weights one would have:
The average factor of 7.0.1/8.0.0 is around 1.8
(that is "45% less fat" would be comparable)
the average factor of 6.7.1/8.0.0 is around 0.2
(that is "500% more fat" would be comparable)]


OK. If I stop being flippant about this, I think you'd have to compare 
the benchmarks for earlier LC8 builds with the dp11 benchmarks to see 
the real improvement in speeds. There were some operations that were 
painfully slow and are now zippy. I'm dismayed that more attention 
hasn't yet been paid to improving the file operations, but the speed of 
string operations has benefited greatly from recent optimization.


--
 Mark Wieder
 ahsoftw...@gmail.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: Take a look back through 2015

[[-hh]]

Accepted, of course. A lot of us can now better live with LC 8.

[Because you are a LC big-cheese I thought more than 5 minutes about how you 
concluded from a factor of *3.5* speed increase to *20%* loss of fat .
(By the way , the rounded result 0.2 gives of course a factor of 5=500%, that 
is an *increase* by 400%, not 500%).]
___
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: Player Object in HTML 5?

[Monte Goulding]

Did you expect to be able to deploy commercial HTML5 apps with community?

Sent from my iPhone

> On 19 Dec 2015, at 4:18 pm, Simon  wrote:
> 
> Ahhh shoot!
> How did I miss that?  $2K a year.
> While I'm not very bothered by HTML5 and LiveCode Indy/Business as I can use
> the Community version, I am surprised that I hadn't seen that it was coming
> out as an add-on.

___
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: Player Object in HTML 5?

[Simon]

Monte Goulding-2 wrote
> Hmm... I know big and rich are a matter of perspective but $500 is hardly
> a massive expense. For me if it saved me more than a few hours it would be
> a false economy not to buy it.

hmmm... My post wasn't about the cost really.  It's about the fact that
although I follow LiveCode very closely (heck I even read your Engine posts
on the forums hoping one day I'll understand what you are talking about) I
missed that HTML5 was a paid for add-on for commercial users.

Simon



--
View this message in context: 
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Player-Object-in-HTML-5-tp4699644p4699680.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.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: Player Object in HTML 5?

[Simon]

Monte Goulding-2 wrote
> Did you expect to be able to deploy commercial HTML5 apps with community?

Nope. 
If I did a commercial HTML5 app it would have to be very big and my client
very rich so not really a problem.

Simon



--
View this message in context: 
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Player-Object-in-HTML-5-tp4699644p4699678.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.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: Player Object in HTML 5?

[Monte Goulding]

Hmm... I know big and rich are a matter of perspective but $500 is hardly a 
massive expense. For me if it saved me more than a few hours it would be a 
false economy not to buy it.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 19 Dec 2015, at 4:40 pm, Simon  wrote:
> 
> Nope. 
> If I did a commercial HTML5 app it would have to be very big and my client
> very rich so not really a problem.

___
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