Re: Proposed stack name changes for the MC IDE

2011-07-02 Thread Björnke von Gierke
I think what Mark meant was not to use mc but instead MetaCard as a  whole 
word. to make it even more obvious.

On 30 Jun 2011, at 16:49, Ken Ray wrote:

 Using a prefix implies that there is the possibility of extending the MC IDE
 in the future and a potential getting-in-the-way. This is something we don't
 want.
 
 I clearly agree that the getting in the way is something we don't want,
 but can you clarify what you mean by extending the MC IDE?
 
 Although it isn't a big deal, I think that using a prefix like mc is very
 RunRev-like and not the right approach. Since the number of IDE stacks is
 supposed to stay at a minimum, a prefix should be unnecessary. If we ever 
 need
 something like this, it would be nice to come up with a really clever and
 friendly solution.
 
 I'd *love* for there to be less IDE stacks - currently there are *70*
 substacks of the Metacard Menu Bar stack. Granted that some of these are old
 copies that can be deleted or are for dialogs to set really old settings, or
 are copies of the Script Editor, but without some significant changes it's
 not going to get much smaller.
 
 I think the issue is that until RunRev creates namespaces inside LC, the IDE
 stacks should be renamed to get out of the way of the developer, at least
 the more common ones like Preferences and Properties. The only issue with
 only renaming *some* stacks is it becomes inconsistent, which is also a
 pain. 
 
 The good thing though is that unless one is working on tools to manipulate
 the IDE itself, they shouldn't encounter the internal stack names of the IDE
 stacks very often, so it may not matter what they get called as long as they
 get out of the way.
 
 Just my 2 cents,
 
 
 Ken Ray
 Sons of Thunder Software, Inc.
 Email: k...@sonsothunder.com
 Web Site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/
 
 
 
 ___
 metacard mailing list
 metacard@lists.runrev.com
 http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard


___
metacard mailing list
metacard@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard


Re: Proposed stack name changes for the MC IDE

2011-07-02 Thread Robert Brenstein

On 30.06.2011 at 8:33 Uhr -0500 Ken Ray apparently wrote:


For the next build of the IDE, I'd like to change the IDE stack names to
have an mc prefix (like mcPreferences), but since this affects anything
that runs as a plugin, etc., I wanted to bring it up for discussion first.

What are your thoughts on this? Good idea? Bad idea? ...?


+1

Robert

___
metacard mailing list
metacard@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard


Re: Proposed stack name changes for the MC IDE

2011-06-30 Thread Mark Schonewille
Hi Ken,

Using a prefix implies that there is the possibility of extending the MC IDE in 
the future and a potential getting-in-the-way. This is something we don't want.

I think that simply calling these stacks MetaCard Something makes a 
friendlier impression. People who need to deal with plug-ins probably already 
have found a solution (e.g. checking the effective filename). 

Although it isn't a big deal, I think that using a prefix like mc is very 
RunRev-like and not the right approach. Since the number of IDE stacks is 
supposed to stay at a minimum, a prefix should be unnecessary. If we ever need 
something like this, it would be nice to come up with a really clever and 
friendly solution.

--
Best regards,

Mark Schonewille

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

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

On 30 jun 2011, at 15:33, Ken Ray wrote:

 Hey all,
 
 I just gave a presentation last weekend at the LiveCode Live event on the MC
 IDE and one of the things I brought up was the fact that a great benefit to
 the MC IDE vs the LiveCode IDE is that it really tries to get out of the
 way of the developer.
 
 And although it currently does a pretty good job of that, there are a few
 places that IMHO still need to be changed. The two that immediately come to
 mind are the Preferences and Properties stacks, both of which prevent you as
 a developer from being able to name *your* stacks Preferences or
 Properties, and there are probably other stack name conflicts as well.
 
 For the next build of the IDE, I'd like to change the IDE stack names to
 have an mc prefix (like mcPreferences), but since this affects anything
 that runs as a plugin, etc., I wanted to bring it up for discussion first.
 
 What are your thoughts on this? Good idea? Bad idea? ...?


___
metacard mailing list
metacard@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard


Re: Proposed stack name changes for the MC IDE

2011-06-30 Thread Richard Gaskin

On 6/30/11 6:33 AM, Ken Ray wrote:

Hey all,

I just gave a presentation last weekend at the LiveCode Live event on the MC
IDE and one of the things I brought up was the fact that a great benefit to
the MC IDE vs the LiveCode IDE is that it really tries to get out of the
way of the developer.

And although it currently does a pretty good job of that, there are a few
places that IMHO still need to be changed. The two that immediately come to
mind are the Preferences and Properties stacks, both of which prevent you as
a developer from being able to name *your* stacks Preferences or
Properties, and there are probably other stack name conflicts as well.

For the next build of the IDE, I'd like to change the IDE stack names to
have an mc prefix (like mcPreferences), but since this affects anything
that runs as a plugin, etc., I wanted to bring it up for discussion first.

What are your thoughts on this? Good idea? Bad idea? ...?


I like it for several reasons:

1. Preferences is such a common name that not changing the IDE's stack 
name is too likely to result in conflict.


2. The proposed prefix solution follows RunRev's convention, long 
established and well understood.


3. It's simple to implement, and as a volunteer project I appreciate the 
impact on your time.


Thanks for taking that on -

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

___
metacard mailing list
metacard@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard


Re: Proposed stack name changes for the MC IDE

2011-06-30 Thread Ken Ray
 Using a prefix implies that there is the possibility of extending the MC IDE
 in the future and a potential getting-in-the-way. This is something we don't
 want.

I clearly agree that the getting in the way is something we don't want,
but can you clarify what you mean by extending the MC IDE?
 
 Although it isn't a big deal, I think that using a prefix like mc is very
 RunRev-like and not the right approach. Since the number of IDE stacks is
 supposed to stay at a minimum, a prefix should be unnecessary. If we ever need
 something like this, it would be nice to come up with a really clever and
 friendly solution.

I'd *love* for there to be less IDE stacks - currently there are *70*
substacks of the Metacard Menu Bar stack. Granted that some of these are old
copies that can be deleted or are for dialogs to set really old settings, or
are copies of the Script Editor, but without some significant changes it's
not going to get much smaller.

I think the issue is that until RunRev creates namespaces inside LC, the IDE
stacks should be renamed to get out of the way of the developer, at least
the more common ones like Preferences and Properties. The only issue with
only renaming *some* stacks is it becomes inconsistent, which is also a
pain. 

The good thing though is that unless one is working on tools to manipulate
the IDE itself, they shouldn't encounter the internal stack names of the IDE
stacks very often, so it may not matter what they get called as long as they
get out of the way.

Just my 2 cents,


Ken Ray
Sons of Thunder Software, Inc.
Email: k...@sonsothunder.com
Web Site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/



___
metacard mailing list
metacard@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard


Re: Proposed stack name changes for the MC IDE

2011-06-30 Thread J. Landman Gay

On 6/30/11 8:33 AM, Ken Ray wrote:

Hey all,

I just gave a presentation last weekend at the LiveCode Live event on the MC
IDE and one of the things I brought up was the fact that a great benefit to
the MC IDE vs the LiveCode IDE is that it really tries to get out of the
way of the developer.

And although it currently does a pretty good job of that, there are a few
places that IMHO still need to be changed. The two that immediately come to
mind are the Preferences and Properties stacks, both of which prevent you as
a developer from being able to name *your* stacks Preferences or
Properties, and there are probably other stack name conflicts as well.

For the next build of the IDE, I'd like to change the IDE stack names to
have an mc prefix (like mcPreferences), but since this affects anything
that runs as a plugin, etc., I wanted to bring it up for discussion first.

What are your thoughts on this? Good idea? Bad idea? ...?


I think it's a good idea and will definitely solve the problem. I also 
don't mind the mc prefix, since mchome, mctools, and mchelp already 
use it in stackfile names and the consistency would be a plus, I'd 
think. We're all pretty much used to it by now.


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

___
metacard mailing list
metacard@lists.runrev.com
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard