Re: Watch out for 2.6 then going back to 2.5
I could use some help. I am not sure how to approach trying to recover my stack. I have lots of backups, but I have to go back many revisions to find a stack the does not produce this error (prior to my brief encounter with 2.6). My stack is just one card, but it has many groups and hundreds of objects, and many new objects, most of which I have added or altered the properties and scripts since the good backup (I was restructuring the script organization and also added more functionality). Thank goodness for Chipp Walters altArchive plugin. Because of it I started making many more backup versions than I used to. Anyway I have two stacks an old one that works and a new one with several days of extensive changes that is somehow corrupted in one or more ways. If I copy objects over, I get all the changes, but do I get the corruption also? The corrupted script is at the card level, but it seems like it is the engine that is failing at runtime, but the same engine runs the old stack, the compiler does not complain. I tried deleting the card scripts and replacing them, but that did not help. I am just not sure how to approach it to make sure I don't waste more time, and I get a good stack. Dennis On Jun 9, 2005, at 12:19 PM, Dennis Brown wrote: I switched to 2.6 for a few hours, and during that time I made some edits and saved a stack I have been working on for some months. I switched back to 2.5.1 due to bugs so I could continue development on my stack. The stack acts goofy now. Here is a snippet of code: repeat with j=1 to 20 put j --mssg box contains 1 get Typ[min(i+1+j,DateLines)] --error on this line executing at 11:59:32 AM TypeFunction: error in source expression Objectcard id 1002 Lineget Typ[min(i+1+j,DateLines)] Hintcard id 1002 The error is complaining that j has not been defined yet When I look at the variable watcher, j is missing. If I 'put j' in the mssg box it is also missing. If I execute the get statement in the mssg box and substitute 1 for j then it works. I think I have just lost another 2 days work due to 2.6 :-( I have to assume that 2.6 was rushed to meet the Tiger announcement and did not go through the proper beta cycle. Who does Beta testing for these releases anyway? Dennis ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
RE: Watch out for 2.6 then going back to 2.5
I would say try creating a new stack and copying over all of the objects and scripts. Sometimes stacks become corrupted, and this often works to fix that. Sometimes objects become corrupted, and recreating that object might work in that situation. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dennis Brown Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 5:00 PM To: How to use Revolution Subject: Re: Watch out for 2.6 then going back to 2.5 I could use some help. I am not sure how to approach trying to recover my stack. I have lots of backups, but I have to go back many revisions to find a stack the does not produce this error (prior to my brief encounter with 2.6). My stack is just one card, but it has many groups and hundreds of objects, and many new objects, most of which I have added or altered the properties and scripts since the good backup (I was restructuring the script organization and also added more functionality). Thank goodness for Chipp Walters altArchive plugin. Because of it I started making many more backup versions than I used to. Anyway I have two stacks an old one that works and a new one with several days of extensive changes that is somehow corrupted in one or more ways. If I copy objects over, I get all the changes, but do I get the corruption also? The corrupted script is at the card level, but it seems like it is the engine that is failing at runtime, but the same engine runs the old stack, the compiler does not complain. I tried deleting the card scripts and replacing them, but that did not help. I am just not sure how to approach it to make sure I don't waste more time, and I get a good stack. Dennis On Jun 9, 2005, at 12:19 PM, Dennis Brown wrote: I switched to 2.6 for a few hours, and during that time I made some edits and saved a stack I have been working on for some months. I switched back to 2.5.1 due to bugs so I could continue development on my stack. The stack acts goofy now. Here is a snippet of code: repeat with j=1 to 20 put j --mssg box contains 1 get Typ[min(i+1+j,DateLines)] --error on this line executing at 11:59:32 AM TypeFunction: error in source expression Objectcard id 1002 Lineget Typ[min(i+1+j,DateLines)] Hintcard id 1002 The error is complaining that j has not been defined yet When I look at the variable watcher, j is missing. If I 'put j' in the mssg box it is also missing. If I execute the get statement in the mssg box and substitute 1 for j then it works. I think I have just lost another 2 days work due to 2.6 :-( I have to assume that 2.6 was rushed to meet the Tiger announcement and did not go through the proper beta cycle. Who does Beta testing for these releases anyway? Dennis ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Watch out for 2.6 then going back to 2.5
Dennis Brown wrote: I could use some help. I am not sure how to approach trying to recover my stack. I have lots of backups, but I have to go back many revisions to find a stack the does not produce this error (prior to my brief encounter with 2.6). If the Rev IDE is not reporting corruption, it may not be corrupted at all. Your original report said: repeat with j=1 to 20 put j --mssg box contains 1 get Typ[min(i+1+j,DateLines)] --error on this line executing at 11:59:32 AM TypeFunction: error in source expression Objectcard id 1002 Lineget Typ[min(i+1+j,DateLines)] Hintcard id 1002 The error is complaining that j has not been defined yet I don't see j mentioned specifically in the error report, just source expression. So if j is okay and 1 is one and not an undefined lower-case L, what's in i and DateLines? If those check out, what happens if you delete and retype that line? It may be that there's an option-space or other illegal non-printing character accidently put in there -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Media Corporation __ Rev tools and more: http://www.fourthworld.com/rev ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Watch out for 2.6 then going back to 2.5
repeat with j=1 to 20 put j --mssg box contains 1 get Typ[min(i+1+j,DateLines)] --error on this line executing at 11:59:32 AM TypeFunction: error in source expression Objectcard id 1002 Lineget Typ[min(i+1+j,DateLines)] Hintcard id 1002 The error is complaining that j has not been defined yet When I look at the variable watcher, j is missing. If I 'put j' in the mssg box it is also missing. If I execute the get statement in the mssg box and substitute 1 for j then it works. Do you have explicit variables turned on? Where is i defined? As one of those who did beta test 2.6, I found it very reliable and had no problems getting my stacks to run. Perhaps you could post your complete script, so we could try to find a solution for you. Cheers, Sarah ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Watch out for 2.6 then going back to 2.5
Richard,Sarah,Mark,Jon I found the problem and my face is a bit red. It was not stack corruption, it was a caused by a typo that caused a missing global declaration. The error just by coincidence happened to occur during the few hours I was trying to run on 2.6. I had so many reverts during that time, I must have messed up an edit. The reason I was so confused, was that when I hit debug in the error window, it showed me the line, but the variable watcher was in a different context which had the global listed but did not have j listed. Typing into the message box used the variable watcher context. I am usually pretty good with debugging problems (even though I am still new with Rev) but I was led astray by what I thought the tool was showing me. However, in trying to duplicate the context error now, I can't. It does the right thing. So now I am wondering if it was somehow operator error. I usually figure operator error, but this time I may have been too quick to blame 2.6 because I ran into so many other problems so quickly when I tried using it --blame the one with the long rap sheet that was in the vicinity. I will not likely repeat this mistake. Thank you for the help. I am sorry to have caused you any inconvenience. My apologies to 2.6 for being accused of a crime it did not commit. Thank goodness I can recover from this. Dennis On Jun 9, 2005, at 6:35 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote: Dennis Brown wrote: I could use some help. I am not sure how to approach trying to recover my stack. I have lots of backups, but I have to go back many revisions to find a stack the does not produce this error (prior to my brief encounter with 2.6). If the Rev IDE is not reporting corruption, it may not be corrupted at all. Your original report said: repeat with j=1 to 20 put j --mssg box contains 1 get Typ[min(i+1+j,DateLines)] --error on this line executing at 11:59:32 AM TypeFunction: error in source expression Objectcard id 1002 Lineget Typ[min(i+1+j,DateLines)] Hintcard id 1002 The error is complaining that j has not been defined yet I don't see j mentioned specifically in the error report, just source expression. So if j is okay and 1 is one and not an undefined lower-case L, what's in i and DateLines? If those check out, what happens if you delete and retype that line? It may be that there's an option-space or other illegal non- printing character accidently put in there -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Media Corporation __ Rev tools and more: http://www.fourthworld.com/rev ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Watch out for 2.6 then going back to 2.5
Dennis Brown wrote: Richard,Sarah,Mark,Jon I found the problem and my face is a bit red. It was not stack corruption, it was a caused by a typo That's good news for everyone. Typos are easy to fix, but corruption isn't. Fortunately, given the way Rev handles its files, corrupted stack are extremely rare - here's some background: http://lists.runrev.com/pipermail/use-revolution/2003-June/017928.html http://lists.runrev.com/pipermail/use-revolution/2002-December/010842.html http://lists.runrev.com/pipermail/use-revolution/2004-August/041134.html And a note from the inventor of the engine on the subject: http://lists.runrev.com/pipermail/use-revolution/2002-December/010776.html -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Media Corporation __ Rev tools and more: http://www.fourthworld.com/rev ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
