Re: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Dave Kilroy]

This is a follow up to the issue of bad line endings when working on a
scriptOnlyStack in Atom. 

Just to note that once I used a ".livecodescript" file extension rather than
".livecode" that I was once again able to use Atom as it's editor without
LiveCode objecting to the line endings...



-
"The first 90% of the task takes 90% of the time, and the last 10% takes the 
other 90% of the time."
Peter M. Brigham 
--
View this message in context: 
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Blog-Script-Only-Stacks-tp4701942p4702591.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: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Tim Bleiler]

Thanks Mark!!

Sorry to take up everyone’s time on that, but good to know I guess.

Tim


> On Mar 4, 2016, at 10:22 AM, Mark Waddingham  wrote:
> 
> On 2016-03-04 16:12, Tim Bleiler wrote:
>> Thanks Mark,
>> I submitted the file in bug report 17067.
>> Tim
> 
> Okay - so - the problem with that file is that your text editor has decided 
> to be nice and convert normal double-quote " to appropriate paired quotes. 
> Your file has:
> 
>script “MyTest”
> 
> Rather than
> 
>script "MyTest"
> 
> You also have paired quotes around the string in the put too... You might 
> want to turn off this 'cleverness' of your preferred text editor when writing 
> script-only stacks!
> 
> 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


___
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: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Tim Bleiler]

Thanks Mark,

I submitted the file in bug report 17067.

Tim


> On Mar 4, 2016, at 5:38 AM, Mark Waddingham  wrote:
> 
> On 2016-03-03 20:45, Tim Bleiler wrote:
>> It probably doesn’t matter much as long as it’s made clear what
>> encodings are allowed. I would guess most users taking advantage of
>> this feature could live with that. Casual users may be confused
>> however, because most of us don’t give much thought to such details; a
>> text file is a text file. Mark’s blog post doesn’t make any
>> distinction either and implies any text file should work.
> 
> The current implementation in the engine uses the BOM to determine what the 
> encoding is - if there is no BOM then it assumes the native encoding (e.g. 
> MacRoman on Mac).
> 
> In terms of line endings, the engine converts all line endings to ASCII 10 
> (the universal LiveCode line ending). For reference these are:
>   CR LF (ascii 13 then ascii 10 - default windows line endings)
>   CR (ascii 13 - old-style Mac line endings)
>   LF (ascii 10 - unix line endings)
> 
> So, it shouldn't matter what line endings the input file has, and whether 
> they are mixed or not.
> 
> I'm surprised lack of BOM in a simple script only stack would cause it to 
> fail to load... Tim, could you attach the script only stack files you tried 
> to create which fail to load to a bug report so we can take a look?
> 
> 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


___
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: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Tim Bleiler]

Thanks Jim,

Since you aren’t having the problem I tried a couple of other things. First, I 
had been dragging the file to the Livecode icon in the dock, so I tried opening 
it through the menu as you had done but I still get a file is not a stack 
message. I then shut my whole system down and tried everything again with the 
same result. So, it’s a bit mysterious. 

Tim


> On Mar 3, 2016, at 3:22 PM, Jim Lambert  wrote:
> 
>> TimB wrote:
>> If I open one up in TextEdit and save it, Livecode gives me the error 
>> message: “Unable to open stack: File is not a stack”.
> 
> Hi Tim,
> I’m not seeing that here with LC 8.0 (dp 15)
> 
> 1. Launch TextEdit
> 2. File > New
> 3. Format > Make Plain Text
> 4. type
> 
> script "test2"
> on openstack
> answer "Wow!"
> end openstack
> 
> 5. File > Save
> 6. name it
> “test2.livecode"  Use UTF-8 encoding
> 7. File > Close
> 
> 8. Switch to LC
> 9. File > Open Stack…
> 10. Select “test2.livecode”
> 11. Answer dialog appears with “Wow!”
> 
> Jim Lambert


___
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: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Mark Waddingham]

On 2016-03-03 20:45, Tim Bleiler wrote:

It probably doesn’t matter much as long as it’s made clear what
encodings are allowed. I would guess most users taking advantage of
this feature could live with that. Casual users may be confused
however, because most of us don’t give much thought to such details; a
text file is a text file. Mark’s blog post doesn’t make any
distinction either and implies any text file should work.


The current implementation in the engine uses the BOM to determine what 
the encoding is - if there is no BOM then it assumes the native encoding 
(e.g. MacRoman on Mac).


In terms of line endings, the engine converts all line endings to ASCII 
10 (the universal LiveCode line ending). For reference these are:

   CR LF (ascii 13 then ascii 10 - default windows line endings)
   CR (ascii 13 - old-style Mac line endings)
   LF (ascii 10 - unix line endings)

So, it shouldn't matter what line endings the input file has, and 
whether they are mixed or not.


I'm surprised lack of BOM in a simple script only stack would cause it 
to fail to load... Tim, could you attach the script only stack files you 
tried to create which fail to load to a bug report so we can take a 
look?


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: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Mark Waddingham]

On 2016-03-03 19:43, Robert Mann wrote:
I guess you checked that the first line is not empty and that there is 
no

space before the first line?

"script" must be at the beginning of first line. Engine is very pick at
that.

And sometimes the engine/ide adds another line at top, leading to 2 
lines

starting with "script"
so in the erasing process, by hand.. things can happen.


I guess my original intent of script only stacks was that they would be 
created and edited in the IDE - so the fact that there is some strict 
syntax to follow didn't really matter.


The main problem with allowing the syntax of script only stacks to be 
more flexible is that any information before the very first line of 
script in a script only stack (i.e. after the "script" line) would be 
inaccessible from the engine.


The strictness means that - the implementation of script only stacks is 
simple, and it guarantees that there is no non-code related 'churn' in 
script only stack files. The latter is really important for VCS needs.


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: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Peter TB Brett]

On 03/03/2016 18:12, Peter TB Brett wrote:

On 03/03/2016 17:48, Tim Bleiler wrote:

In the blog post, Mark states that "The fact that script only stack
files really are just text files is really important! It means you can
edit and create them in any text editor you choose, and use any text
based processing tool on them…”

I’ve been trying to work with script only stacks on Mac OS X 10.11 for
a few weeks now, at least since Livecode version 8 dp12. If I open one
up in TextEdit and save it, Livecode gives me the error message:
“Unable to open stack: File is not a stack”. The only way to recover
the script has been to copy and paste it from the text editor into a
new script only stack script. Additionally, I’ve never been able to
create one in a text editor from scratch without getting the same
error message from Livecode when I try to open it. I figure I must be
doing something wrong because with the team using these all the time I
don’t see how they wouldn’t have run into this. Any suggestions?


The only thing I can think of to suggest is to make sure that your
editor is saving the file as UTF-16 text.

Usually script-only stacks start with a UTF-16 byte order mark.


And of course I have egg on my face because script-only stacks are 
UTF-8, not UTF-16.  Thank you to everyone who corrected me!


  Peter

--
Dr Peter Brett 
LiveCode Open Source Team

LiveCode 2016 Conference https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/

___
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: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Peter TB Brett]

On 03/03/2016 18:59, Peter Bogdanoff wrote:

It would seem that script-only stacks would not be able to be locked—have the 
password property set.

This would seem to be a limitation for commercially-released projects with 
library stacks, unless they are a substack of something else.


Yes, that's correct.  I guess it would be possible to for someone to 
create a tool that goes through a set of script only stacks, converts 
them to "normal" stackfiles, and adds a password.  That might help 
people who want to develop using script-only stacks and deploy as 
secured stackfiles.


 Peter

--
Dr Peter Brett 
LiveCode Open Source Team

LiveCode 2016 Conference https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/

___
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: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Jim Lambert]

> TimB wrote:
> If I open one up in TextEdit and save it, Livecode gives me the error 
> message: “Unable to open stack: File is not a stack”.

Hi Tim,
I’m not seeing that here with LC 8.0 (dp 15)

1. Launch TextEdit
2. File > New
3. Format > Make Plain Text
4. type

script "test2"
on openstack
answer "Wow!"
end openstack

5. File > Save
6. name it
“test2.livecode"  Use UTF-8 encoding
7. File > Close

8. Switch to LC
9. File > Open Stack…
10. Select “test2.livecode”
11. Answer dialog appears with “Wow!”

Jim Lambert


___
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: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Tim Bleiler]

It probably doesn’t matter much as long as it’s made clear what encodings are 
allowed. I would guess most users taking advantage of this feature could live 
with that. Casual users may be confused however, because most of us don’t give 
much thought to such details; a text file is a text file. Mark’s blog post 
doesn’t make any distinction either and implies any text file should work. 

Tim


> On Mar 3, 2016, at 2:37 PM, Monte Goulding  wrote:
> 
> I know I have discussed this with Mark Waddingham before. I believe he was 
> originally thinking of allowing other encodings at some point but was not 
> averse to my suggestion of only supporting UTF8 with or without BOM.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On 4 Mar 2016, at 6:17 AM, Tim Bleiler > > wrote:
>> 
>> I guess that leaves the question of whether this should remain a requirement 
>> of script only stacks or if the engine can be modified to accept without BOM
> 

___
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: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Monte Goulding]

That is indeed the use case I used to justify the inclusion of the property 
when I contributed it. The other one was a quick way to convert an existing 
stack to scriptOnly without copy and paste. There was some discussion if we 
should add the property due to the risks to stack content when setting to true.

Cheers

Monte

Sent from my iPhone

> On 4 Mar 2016, at 6:34 AM, Tim Bleiler  wrote:
> 
> Since we can refer to script only stacks in our scripts exactly the same as a 
> regular stack, I think you could work around the problem by making your own 
> "pre-build" controller to loop through all your script only stacks and set 
> their scriptOnly property to false and then lock those stacks as you would in 
> the past before doing the standalone build.

___
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: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Monte Goulding]

I know I have discussed this with Mark Waddingham before. I believe he was 
originally thinking of allowing other encodings at some point but was not 
averse to my suggestion of only supporting UTF8 with or without BOM.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 4 Mar 2016, at 6:17 AM, Tim Bleiler  wrote:
> 
> I guess that leaves the question of whether this should remain a requirement 
> of script only stacks or if the engine can be modified to accept without BOM

___
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: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Tim Bleiler]

> On Mar 3, 2016, at 1:59 PM, Peter Bogdanoff  wrote:
> 
> It would seem that script-only stacks would not be able to be locked—have the 
> password property set.
> 
> This would seem to be a limitation for commercially-released projects with 
> library stacks, unless they are a substack of something else.


That’s a good point, Peter. Since we can refer to script only stacks in our 
scripts exactly the same as a regular stack, I think you could work around the 
problem by making your own "pre-build" controller to loop through all your 
script only stacks and set their scriptOnly property to false and then lock 
those stacks as you would in the past before doing the standalone build. 
Additionally, You’d probably need to make sure you weren’t overwriting your 
script only versions.

Tim


___
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: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Tim Bleiler]

> On Mar 3, 2016, at 2:01 PM, Tore Nilsen  wrote:
> 
> I think TextWrangler is a better choice than TextEdit for this purpose. In 
> textWrangler you can specify both UTF 16 and Unix line endings.
> 

TextWrangler shows a working script only stacks as UTF-8, with BOM and Unix 
(LF).

A “broken” one shows UTF-8 and Unix (LF). So, the difference is BOM.

A discussion of with or without BOM can be found here:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2223882/whats-different-between-utf-8-and-utf-8-without-bom

I guess that leaves the question of whether this should remain a requirement of 
script only stacks or if the engine can be modified to accept without BOM.

Tim


___
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: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Robert Mann]

I guess you checked that the first line is not empty and that there is no
space before the first line?

"script" must be at the beginning of first line. Engine is very pick at
that.

And sometimes the engine/ide adds another line at top, leading to 2 lines
starting with "script"
so in the erasing process, by hand.. things can happen.
Robert



--
View this message in context: 
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Blog-Script-Only-Stacks-tp4701942p4701956.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: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Richard Gaskin]

Tim Bleiler wrote:

>> On Mar 3, 2016, at 1:38 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
>>
>> I wonder if it needs to use LC's native line ending, ASCII 10,
>> rather than ASCII 13 that many Mac tools use.
>
> Thanks Richard,
>
> First, do you know of way to set this in TextEdit? I don’t see
> anything that can change that.

I haven't used TextEdit in years, so I'm not sure what options it has 
for setting line endings.  I tend to edit text in LC or a variety of 
Linux tools, all which use the Unix convention of ASCII 10 for line endings.


> Second, if that is the case, then the descriptions of how to use
> the script only files or how Livecode processes them probably will
> need to change. Should we call this a bug?

Let's find out if that's the issue first.  Does it work if you save the 
file out of a field with binfile?


If so, it may be useful to note the line ending requirement.  Where is 
that documentation?


--
 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: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Tore Nilsen]

I think TextWrangler is a better choice than TextEdit for this purpose. In 
textWrangler you can specify both UTF 16 and Unix line endings.

Tore
> 3. mar. 2016 kl. 19.57 skrev Tim Bleiler :
> 
> 
> 
>> On Mar 3, 2016, at 1:38 PM, Richard Gaskin  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> I wonder if it needs to use LC's native line ending, ASCII 10, rather than 
>> ASCII 13 that many Mac tools use.
> 
> Thanks Richard,
> 
> First, do you know of way to set this in TextEdit? I don’t see anything that 
> can change that. Second, if that is the case, then the descriptions of how to 
> use the script only files or how Livecode processes them probably will need 
> to change. Should we call this a bug?
> 
> Tim
> ___
> 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: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Peter Bogdanoff]

It would seem that script-only stacks would not be able to be locked—have the 
password property set.

This would seem to be a limitation for commercially-released projects with 
library stacks, unless they are a substack of something else.

Peter Bogdanoff
UCLA

> On Mar 3, 2016, at 8:12 AM, Steven Crighton  
> wrote:
> 
> Dear List
> 
> 
> 
> In LiveCode 8 there is a new option in the (new) 'New Stack' submenu: Script
> only Stack.
> 
> 
> 
> Mark has just published a blog post on this very subject
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://livecode.com/script-only-stacks/
> 
> 
> 
> Looking forward to hearing your comments. Enjoy.
> 
> 
> 
> 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: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Tim Bleiler]

> On Mar 3, 2016, at 1:38 PM, Richard Gaskin  wrote:
> 
> I wonder if it needs to use LC's native line ending, ASCII 10, rather than 
> ASCII 13 that many Mac tools use.

Thanks Richard,

First, do you know of way to set this in TextEdit? I don’t see anything that 
can change that. Second, if that is the case, then the descriptions of how to 
use the script only files or how Livecode processes them probably will need to 
change. Should we call this a bug?

Tim
___
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: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Matt Maier]

I was just reading that the line endings can be different (because of
course they can).
http://www.hyperactivesw.com/cgitutorial/scripts1.html#trouble

*Make sure line endings in scripts are correct for the server platform. DOS
line endings are carriage return and linefeed. Unix line endings are a
single linefeed. Macintosh line endings are a single carriage return (but
note that scripts run by Apache in OS X require Unix line endings.)*
On Mar 3, 2016 10:39 AM, "Richard Gaskin" 
wrote:

> Tim Bleiler wrote:
>
>> Thanks Peter,
>>
>> I gave that a try and I still get the same message. My attempts to create
>> them from scratch were saved as UTF-8 and I’ve tried all the other options
>> in TextEdit as well.  I have noticed  that if I open a functioning script
>> only stack in ATOM it is identified as UTF-8.
>>
>
> I wonder if it needs to use LC's native line ending, ASCII 10, rather than
> ASCII 13 that many Mac tools use.
>
> --
>  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
___
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: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Richard Gaskin]

Tim Bleiler wrote:

Thanks Peter,

I gave that a try and I still get the same message. My attempts to create them 
from scratch were saved as UTF-8 and I’ve tried all the other options in 
TextEdit as well.  I have noticed  that if I open a functioning script only 
stack in ATOM it is identified as UTF-8.


I wonder if it needs to use LC's native line ending, ASCII 10, rather 
than ASCII 13 that many Mac tools use.


--
 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: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Tim Bleiler]

Thanks Peter,

I gave that a try and I still get the same message. My attempts to create them 
from scratch were saved as UTF-8 and I’ve tried all the other options in 
TextEdit as well.  I have noticed  that if I open a functioning script only 
stack in ATOM it is identified as UTF-8.

Tim


> On Mar 3, 2016, at 1:12 PM, Peter TB Brett  wrote:
> 
> On 03/03/2016 17:48, Tim Bleiler wrote:
>> In the blog post, Mark states that "The fact that script only stack files 
>> really are just text files is really important! It means you can edit and 
>> create them in any text editor you choose, and use any text based processing 
>> tool on them…”
>> 
>> I’ve been trying to work with script only stacks on Mac OS X 10.11 for a few 
>> weeks now, at least since Livecode version 8 dp12. If I open one up in 
>> TextEdit and save it, Livecode gives me the error message: “Unable to open 
>> stack: File is not a stack”. The only way to recover the script has been to 
>> copy and paste it from the text editor into a new script only stack script. 
>> Additionally, I’ve never been able to create one in a text editor from 
>> scratch without getting the same error message from Livecode when I try to 
>> open it. I figure I must be doing something wrong because with the team 
>> using these all the time I don’t see how they wouldn’t have run into this. 
>> Any suggestions?
> 
> The only thing I can think of to suggest is to make sure that your editor is 
> saving the file as UTF-16 text.
> 
> Usually script-only stacks start with a UTF-16 byte order mark.
> 
>   Peter
> 
> -- 
> Dr Peter Brett 
> LiveCode Open Source Team
> 
> LiveCode 2016 Conference https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/
> 
> ___
> 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: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Peter TB Brett]

On 03/03/2016 17:48, Tim Bleiler wrote:

In the blog post, Mark states that "The fact that script only stack files 
really are just text files is really important! It means you can edit and create 
them in any text editor you choose, and use any text based processing tool on them…”

I’ve been trying to work with script only stacks on Mac OS X 10.11 for a few 
weeks now, at least since Livecode version 8 dp12. If I open one up in TextEdit 
and save it, Livecode gives me the error message: “Unable to open stack: File 
is not a stack”. The only way to recover the script has been to copy and paste 
it from the text editor into a new script only stack script. Additionally, I’ve 
never been able to create one in a text editor from scratch without getting the 
same error message from Livecode when I try to open it. I figure I must be 
doing something wrong because with the team using these all the time I don’t 
see how they wouldn’t have run into this. Any suggestions?


The only thing I can think of to suggest is to make sure that your 
editor is saving the file as UTF-16 text.


Usually script-only stacks start with a UTF-16 byte order mark.

   Peter

--
Dr Peter Brett 
LiveCode Open Source Team

LiveCode 2016 Conference https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/

___
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

[Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Tim Bleiler]

In the blog post, Mark states that "The fact that script only stack files 
really are just text files is really important! It means you can edit and 
create them in any text editor you choose, and use any text based processing 
tool on them…”

I’ve been trying to work with script only stacks on Mac OS X 10.11 for a few 
weeks now, at least since Livecode version 8 dp12. If I open one up in TextEdit 
and save it, Livecode gives me the error message: “Unable to open stack: File 
is not a stack”. The only way to recover the script has been to copy and paste 
it from the text editor into a new script only stack script. Additionally, I’ve 
never been able to create one in a text editor from scratch without getting the 
same error message from Livecode when I try to open it. I figure I must be 
doing something wrong because with the team using these all the time I don’t 
see how they wouldn’t have run into this. Any suggestions?


Tim Bleiler, Ph.D.
Instructional Designer, HSIT
University at Buffalo


___
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: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

[dunbarx]

Whoa,


Stacks can now be behavior references? Now that is terrific.


Craig Newman



-Original Message-
From: Steven Crighton <steven.crigh...@livecode.com>
To: use-livecode <use-livecode@lists.runrev.com>
Sent: Thu, Mar 3, 2016 11:14 am
Subject: [Blog] Script Only Stacks

Dear List

 

In LiveCode 8 there is a new option in the (new) 'New Stack' submenu: Script
only Stack.

 

Mark has just published a blog post on this very subject

 

 <https://livecode.com/script-only-stacks/>
https://livecode.com/script-only-stacks/

 

Looking forward to hearing your comments. Enjoy.

 

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

[Blog] Script Only Stacks

[Steven Crighton]

Dear List

 

In LiveCode 8 there is a new option in the (new) 'New Stack' submenu: Script
only Stack.

 

Mark has just published a blog post on this very subject

 

 
https://livecode.com/script-only-stacks/

 

Looking forward to hearing your comments. Enjoy.

 

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