Re: "send" vs "dispatch"
On 10/09/2018 07:33 AM, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode wrote: Yup. I groked that. So I always return empty for success and false if not. Nice. -- 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: "send" vs "dispatch"
Yup. I groked that. So I always return empty for success and false if not. > On Oct 8, 2018, at 17:53 , Mark Wieder via use-livecode > wrote: > > Another nice feature of dispatch is that if the handler does not exist in the > target, it will silently and gracefully fail, continuing to execute code > after the call. > > Yeah, that's a double-edged doohickey, though. I *do* use it that way > sometimes as well, but note that if you don't check the result then you won't > know if the dispatch succeeded when you want it to. > > Sometimes silently failing is good, sometimes not so much. YMMV. > > -- > Mark Wieder ___ 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: "send" vs "dispatch"
One of the main reasons I implemented send and call with params in the PR that has been mentioned is because it allows for referenced parameters. The following is an error: on mouseUp local tBar send “foo tBar” to me answer tBar end mouseUp on foo @rBar put “Howdy" into rBar end foo While this works: on mouseUp local tBar send “foo” to me with tBar answer tBar // answers “Howdy" end mouseUp Of course you can’t use referenced params like this using send in time form. ___ 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: "send" vs "dispatch"
ever since I learned that you can pass a whole array using the send command the dispatch doesn't seem that much more convenient at all..i do alot of in time commands so this is very convenient to my needs / style send "mymessage myarray" to this stack for years I thought using this form 'myarray' is sent as a string, but it is actually the whole array and all its data) ..no need to concatenate the variables. On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 8:54 PM Mark Wieder via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > On 10/08/2018 04:41 PM, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode wrote: > > Another nice feature of dispatch is that if the handler does not exist > in the target, it will silently and gracefully fail, continuing to > execute code after the call. > > Yeah, that's a double-edged doohickey, though. I *do* use it that way > sometimes as well, but note that if you don't check the result then you > won't know if the dispatch succeeded when you want it to. > > Sometimes silently failing is good, sometimes not so much. YMMV. > > -- > 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 > ___ 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: "send" vs "dispatch"
On 10/08/2018 04:41 PM, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode wrote: Another nice feature of dispatch is that if the handler does not exist in the target, it will silently and gracefully fail, continuing to execute code after the call. Yeah, that's a double-edged doohickey, though. I *do* use it that way sometimes as well, but note that if you don't check the result then you won't know if the dispatch succeeded when you want it to. Sometimes silently failing is good, sometimes not so much. YMMV. -- 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: "send" vs "dispatch"
I like the dispatch form, separating parameters out from the command. The reason is given stepping into this code, send "test ha" to button 1 I cannot point to the variable "ha" and see the value it contains. But if, dispatch "test" to button 1 with ha I can. I only use send anymore when I need to send in time, otherwise everything is dispatch. Another nice feature of dispatch is that if the handler does not exist in the target, it will silently and gracefully fail, continuing to execute code after the call. This means I can use dispatch in a behavior, and then have the handler only in the targets that need it, without having to check for the existence of the handler, or wrapping the code in a try catch statement. Send will throw an error if the handler does not exist. Bob S > On Oct 5, 2018, at 15:15 , Tom Glod via use-livecode > wrote: > > I've written over 30 000 lines of code in livecode. > > used dispatch once. :) > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 6:09 PM Geoff Canyon via use-livecode < > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > >> A word to the wise (mostly for IDE and extension developers): this will >> successfully compile: >> >> send "test" to button 1 with "ha" >> >> And then if the IDE is swallowing up your error messages (as it does for >> extensions like Navigator) it will even deliver the message "test" to >> button 1, just without any arguments, and then die silently. >> >> Outside of "rev" stacks, it will deliver the message without arguments and >> then throw an error saying there is no handler "with". I just checked, and >> amazingly this will work: >> >> on mouseUp >> send "test" to button 1 with "ha" >> end mouseUp >> >> on with >> answer "WTH?" >> end with >> >> But that's obviously unlikely. Far more likely if you're dealing with >> code you wrote before you became aware of "dispatch" (or maybe before >> "dispatch" was a thing -- I think Navigator predates LC 3.5) is that you >> decide to add an argument to a remote call and don't notice that it's a >> "send" rather than a "dispatch", and then spend half an hour trying to >> figure out why your arguments aren't passing through . >> ___ >> 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 ___ 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: "send" vs "dispatch"
Probably the “in time” variant along with parity. The PR also opens up sending to widget handlers which is what I’m waiting for. Thanks, Brian On Oct 5, 2018, 9:36 PM -0400, Geoff Canyon via use-livecode , wrote: > Is there a benefit to adding parameters to send? Or does this just bring it > into parity/redundancy with dispatch? > > On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 3:16 PM Brian Milby via use-livecode < > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > > > There is a PR to change this: > > https://github.com/livecode/livecode/pull/6479 > > > > Will add args to send and call. > > > > Thanks, > > Brian > > On Oct 5, 2018, 6:09 PM -0400, Geoff Canyon via use-livecode < > > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com>, wrote: > > > A word to the wise (mostly for IDE and extension developers): this will > > > successfully compile: > > > > > > send "test" to button 1 with "ha" > > > > > > And then if the IDE is swallowing up your error messages (as it does for > > > extensions like Navigator) it will even deliver the message "test" to > > > button 1, just without any arguments, and then die silently. > > > > > > Outside of "rev" stacks, it will deliver the message without arguments > > and > > > then throw an error saying there is no handler "with". I just checked, > > and > > > amazingly this will work: > > > > > > on mouseUp > > > send "test" to button 1 with "ha" > > > end mouseUp > > > > > > on with > > > answer "WTH?" > > > end with > > > > > > But that's obviously unlikely. Far more likely if you're dealing with > > > code you wrote before you became aware of "dispatch" (or maybe before > > > "dispatch" was a thing -- I think Navigator predates LC 3.5) is that you > > > decide to add an argument to a remote call and don't notice that it's a > > > "send" rather than a "dispatch", and then spend half an hour trying to > > > figure out why your arguments aren't passing through . > > > ___ > > > 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 > > > ___ > 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: "send" vs "dispatch"
Is there a benefit to adding parameters to send? Or does this just bring it into parity/redundancy with dispatch? On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 3:16 PM Brian Milby via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > There is a PR to change this: > https://github.com/livecode/livecode/pull/6479 > > Will add args to send and call. > > Thanks, > Brian > On Oct 5, 2018, 6:09 PM -0400, Geoff Canyon via use-livecode < > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com>, wrote: > > A word to the wise (mostly for IDE and extension developers): this will > > successfully compile: > > > > send "test" to button 1 with "ha" > > > > And then if the IDE is swallowing up your error messages (as it does for > > extensions like Navigator) it will even deliver the message "test" to > > button 1, just without any arguments, and then die silently. > > > > Outside of "rev" stacks, it will deliver the message without arguments > and > > then throw an error saying there is no handler "with". I just checked, > and > > amazingly this will work: > > > > on mouseUp > > send "test" to button 1 with "ha" > > end mouseUp > > > > on with > > answer "WTH?" > > end with > > > > But that's obviously unlikely. Far more likely if you're dealing with > > code you wrote before you became aware of "dispatch" (or maybe before > > "dispatch" was a thing -- I think Navigator predates LC 3.5) is that you > > decide to add an argument to a remote call and don't notice that it's a > > "send" rather than a "dispatch", and then spend half an hour trying to > > figure out why your arguments aren't passing through . > > ___ > > 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 > ___ 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: "send" vs "dispatch"
If you have multiple parameters, dispatch is easier, cleaner, and safer. So even if I don't have parameters, unless I need a time delay I use dispatch. Also, you can use dispatch function to call functions. gc On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 3:16 PM Peter Bogdanoff via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > I’m finding it’s best to do this when you “send” and have a parameter: > > send “test ha” to button 1 > > > Peter Bogdanoff > ArtsInteractive > ___ 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: "send" vs "dispatch"
Ha -- there are about 7,000 lines of code in Navigator -- I think that means I've written about...70,000 lines of code? :-) But in any case, there are 80 instances of Dispatch and 63 instances of Send in Navigator. My next step I think is to learn more about how Sublime Text handles find and replace across multiple files, because every instance of Send that doesn't involve a time delay is going to become a dispatch. On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 3:15 PM Tom Glod via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > I've written over 30 000 lines of code in livecode. > > used dispatch once. :) > ___ 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: "send" vs "dispatch"
On 10/05/2018 03:08 PM, Geoff Canyon via use-livecode wrote: on with answer "WTH?" end with I find that quite disturbing. But I quite agree with the answer -- 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: "send" vs "dispatch"
On 10/05/2018 03:15 PM, Tom Glod via use-livecode wrote: I've written over 30 000 lines of code in livecode. used dispatch once. :) Dispatch is awesome. The only time I use 'send' any more is when I need the 'in time' form. -- 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: "send" vs "dispatch"
cool That is very useful indeed. On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 6:16 PM Brian Milby via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > There is a PR to change this: > https://github.com/livecode/livecode/pull/6479 > > Will add args to send and call. > > Thanks, > Brian > On Oct 5, 2018, 6:09 PM -0400, Geoff Canyon via use-livecode < > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com>, wrote: > > A word to the wise (mostly for IDE and extension developers): this will > > successfully compile: > > > > send "test" to button 1 with "ha" > > > > And then if the IDE is swallowing up your error messages (as it does for > > extensions like Navigator) it will even deliver the message "test" to > > button 1, just without any arguments, and then die silently. > > > > Outside of "rev" stacks, it will deliver the message without arguments > and > > then throw an error saying there is no handler "with". I just checked, > and > > amazingly this will work: > > > > on mouseUp > > send "test" to button 1 with "ha" > > end mouseUp > > > > on with > > answer "WTH?" > > end with > > > > But that's obviously unlikely. Far more likely if you're dealing with > > code you wrote before you became aware of "dispatch" (or maybe before > > "dispatch" was a thing -- I think Navigator predates LC 3.5) is that you > > decide to add an argument to a remote call and don't notice that it's a > > "send" rather than a "dispatch", and then spend half an hour trying to > > figure out why your arguments aren't passing through . > > ___ > > 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 > ___ 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: "send" vs "dispatch"
There is a PR to change this: https://github.com/livecode/livecode/pull/6479 Will add args to send and call. Thanks, Brian On Oct 5, 2018, 6:09 PM -0400, Geoff Canyon via use-livecode , wrote: > A word to the wise (mostly for IDE and extension developers): this will > successfully compile: > > send "test" to button 1 with "ha" > > And then if the IDE is swallowing up your error messages (as it does for > extensions like Navigator) it will even deliver the message "test" to > button 1, just without any arguments, and then die silently. > > Outside of "rev" stacks, it will deliver the message without arguments and > then throw an error saying there is no handler "with". I just checked, and > amazingly this will work: > > on mouseUp > send "test" to button 1 with "ha" > end mouseUp > > on with > answer "WTH?" > end with > > But that's obviously unlikely. Far more likely if you're dealing with > code you wrote before you became aware of "dispatch" (or maybe before > "dispatch" was a thing -- I think Navigator predates LC 3.5) is that you > decide to add an argument to a remote call and don't notice that it's a > "send" rather than a "dispatch", and then spend half an hour trying to > figure out why your arguments aren't passing through . > ___ > 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: "send" vs "dispatch"
I’m finding it’s best to do this when you “send” and have a parameter: send “test ha” to button 1 Peter Bogdanoff ArtsInteractive > On Oct 5, 2018, at 3:08 PM, Geoff Canyon via use-livecode > wrote: > > A word to the wise (mostly for IDE and extension developers): this will > successfully compile: > > send "test" to button 1 with "ha" > > And then if the IDE is swallowing up your error messages (as it does for > extensions like Navigator) it will even deliver the message "test" to > button 1, just without any arguments, and then die silently. > > Outside of "rev" stacks, it will deliver the message without arguments and > then throw an error saying there is no handler "with". I just checked, and > amazingly this will work: > > on mouseUp > send "test" to button 1 with "ha" > end mouseUp > > on with > answer "WTH?" > end with > > But that's obviously unlikely. Far more likely if you're dealing with > code you wrote before you became aware of "dispatch" (or maybe before > "dispatch" was a thing -- I think Navigator predates LC 3.5) is that you > decide to add an argument to a remote call and don't notice that it's a > "send" rather than a "dispatch", and then spend half an hour trying to > figure out why your arguments aren't passing through . > ___ > 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: "send" vs "dispatch"
I've written over 30 000 lines of code in livecode. used dispatch once. :) On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 6:09 PM Geoff Canyon via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > A word to the wise (mostly for IDE and extension developers): this will > successfully compile: > >send "test" to button 1 with "ha" > > And then if the IDE is swallowing up your error messages (as it does for > extensions like Navigator) it will even deliver the message "test" to > button 1, just without any arguments, and then die silently. > > Outside of "rev" stacks, it will deliver the message without arguments and > then throw an error saying there is no handler "with". I just checked, and > amazingly this will work: > > on mouseUp >send "test" to button 1 with "ha" > end mouseUp > > on with >answer "WTH?" > end with > > But that's obviously unlikely. Far more likely if you're dealing with > code you wrote before you became aware of "dispatch" (or maybe before > "dispatch" was a thing -- I think Navigator predates LC 3.5) is that you > decide to add an argument to a remote call and don't notice that it's a > "send" rather than a "dispatch", and then spend half an hour trying to > figure out why your arguments aren't passing through . > ___ > 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
