It is like one of those movies where one has a nightmare, but wakes up and
repents, vowing to never write a bad user interface again, donating time to
build beautiful GUIs for little apps whose GUIs were disfigured by the actions
of roving gangs of depressed designers.
> On Jul 3, 2019, at 7:10
Ah, I neglected to emphasize "open process" in contrast with "shell".
> On Jun 28, 2019, at 6:30 PM, doc hawk via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
>
> dar delivered,
>>
>> There is a note on open process in the Dictionary that says that on OS X
>> systems you can start an application but not a Unix p
There is a note on open process in the Dictionary that says that on OS X
systems you can start an application but not a Unix process, so I suppose the
LiveCode app intermediary must be needed. However, I have a vague memory of
running a CLI program from open process, but I don't remember how. I
Do the same thing, but use a polygon and add points.
> On Jun 28, 2019, at 12:21 PM, General 2018 via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> Hi ,
>
> Thanks , so nearly - I have a line that follows the object from the top left
> corner.
>
> What I need is just like drawing with a pen , the object being t
I don't know if this is related or not... I have seen the rectangle of the
window off by a similar amount when it overlaps the LiveCode IDE toolbar.
> On Jun 28, 2019, at 9:54 AM, Curry Kenworthy via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
>
> Paul:
>
> > LiveCode thinks the mouse is about 30-40 pixels ABOV
As I grab my chest and stagger, I realize that I have been bumped up to
management.
> On Jun 28, 2019, at 9:09 AM, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> Like I said, ALL developers. :-)
>
> Bob S
>
>
>> On Jun 28, 2019, at 08:06 , Dar Scott Consulti
Only those who write code that crashes. ;-)
> On Jun 28, 2019, at 8:52 AM, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> I thought ALL developers knew what that meant! :-)
>
> Bob S
>
>
>> On Jun 28, 2019, at 02:02 , Lagi Pittas via use-livecode
>> wrote:
>>
>> Just in Case i'm the only one
Is that different from a just plain crash?
> On Jun 28, 2019, at 5:52 AM, Paul Dupuis via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> On 6/28/2019 5:02 AM, Lagi Pittas via use-livecode wrote:
>> Crash To Desktop?
> Yes.
>
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livec
The effective rect of the stack is the absolute rect of the window including
the title, all of the borders (where there are any) and and the decorations.
Thus, the top will be (say) 22 pixels less than the rect of the stack.
You can subtract the upper left of the working screenRect from either t
I don't know the best way. I would start like this (assuming my understanding
of your need is even close)
1. Create the "line" object, either an open polygon or a single line segment
(depending on your need), either by code or in the design.
2. Create the drawing object that you want to create t
There are a couple places in System Report (About this Mac --> System Report)
that will show what apps are 32-bit: Software->Applications and
Software->Legacy Software. I like the latter because it is more complete and
covers more. For example all of the LiveCode 9 applications are 64-bit, but t
Some thoughts:
A. Define round as a way to get rid of the fractional part.
B. Use a simple (almost regular) polygon that can be multiplied to be bigger.
C. Create your own functions that hide decimal fractions and let students use
them.
1. Use turtle graphics
D. Draw a circle of diameter 10
I wonder whether explicitly specifying "wildcard pattern" would fix this.
(I misread your query as referring to arrays with numeric elements, not arrays
with numeric keys. Thus, my fascination with the new "where" where one can use
"each > 22.2". Even with your use, "where" might be interesting.
If LiveCode 9.5 is not applicable (since it is not released), then...
If those numbers are codes taken from some small universe of codes, then maybe
intersect will work:
intersect affectedZipCodes with TreatedZipCodes into inspectionZipCodes
But if you can go with 9.5, then maybe "where" will w
I think the filtering of array items was introduced in 8.1, so combine and
split might not be needed. However, unless pattern matching will do, one has to
wait until 9.5 to use the "where" clause in "filter".
> On Jun 20, 2019, at 3:37 PM, hh via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> Why not "combine arr
In 9.5, perhaps,
filter ... where
will do it.
> On Jun 20, 2019, at 2:56 PM, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> I need to filter a numeric array by the content of the keys, not by the keys
> themselves. Is there a way to do that without looping through the entire
> array and lookin
I get it. I thought the "paper tape" table was a distribution of individual
colors and didn't recognize the values as bin indicators. I changed the number
of bins to 4 and can see the x^3. I get a little dense at times.
Ah, and if I hold the pointer over the "paper tape", I see a nice summary.
I took a gander.
I think I'm doing something wrong. When I check the Table checkbox, I get x*3
values not x^3 values.
> On Jun 20, 2019, at 5:43 AM, hh via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> [Version 100 computes the marginal color value distribution for each channel
> R/G/B
> of an image and some
A hint for bounty hunters:
It seems to me I have seen this outside of LiveCode. Perhaps the bug is a
common one.
I'm on a Mac.
I don't trust my memory; YMMD.
> On Aug 14, 2017, at 5:38 PM, RunRevPlanet via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Over at LiveCode Quality Control Centre (QCC) the
Sure. I do it all the time and everybody knows how 1D I am.
Some random thoughts:
A Turing machine might be considered 1D. It can draw x,y.
This past month, I was working in very high dimensions. I was not able to
visualize that very well and used dimension reduction techniques such as PCA,
U
Sure, I'll agree (SVG notwithstanding).
> On Jun 14, 2019, at 5:01 PM, hh via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> @Dar.
> Could we agree that in LC Script we cannot draw subpixels? (I would like
> to...)
>
> And yes, you are right with the invariance of width and height. The number of
> pixels
> isn't
When we apply math, we must map what we see to our mathematical models. What
we see is LiveCode. The application of math is thus an interpretation. (The
interpretation of calendar year or how-old-are-you might not apply.)
I do agree with you, except for the part that one has to redefine width
I tried to avoid the confusion by using the word pixel. I goofed somewhere.
I don't understand why you say "pixel 1". Other that that, I think we are
saying the same thing.
> On Jun 14, 2019, at 3:54 PM, hh via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> @Dar.
>
> Probably you wish with your post avoid the c
When we apply math, we must map what we see to our mathematical models. What
we see is LiveCode. The application of math is thus an interpretation. (The
interpretation of calendar year or how-old-are-you might not apply.)
I do agree with you, except for the part that one has to redefine width
I like this interpretation. I don't think it is a popular view, but it makes
sense to me.
I would change the range wording, though, to something like this:
Pixel 0 ranges from 0 to 1.
For example, the rect of a card has zeros.
Maybe it depends on whether one wants to draw pixels on the intersec
This works for me on macOS Mojave 10.14.15 using LiveCode 9.0.4. By "works", I
mean it does some things that I think might be close to what you want. I have
a field named "test field" on a card and button to clear that. I hold down keys
while the field does not have the focus. I would guess y
I see those on my old android phone. A popup blocked things for a bit in the
android web browser and in the Chrome browser, it took a bit to clear it.
> On Jun 13, 2019, at 2:21 PM, Matthias Rebbe via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> yesterday i´ve received an email from a user who informe
Perhaps this would need a delay after the pass. For example, wait until the key
is up and then maybe wait a bit more. This would allow all of the events to
come in before they are flushed. Maybe.
(I think my state-variable method is simpler, but simple is in the eye of the
beholder.)
> On Jun
Maybe something like this? (I used raw, so adjust as you need.)
local wasUp = true
on rawKeyDown
if wasUp then
doSomething
end if
put false into wasUp
end rawKeyDown
on rawKeyUp
put true into wasUp
end rawKeyUp
command doSomething
put "x" after me
end doSomething
>
I think this is important.
Perhaps related is why this is an execution error.
> On Jun 11, 2019, at 2:18 AM, Alex Tweedly via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> Thank you Peter and Mark.
>
> I guess I see it now - though it's still against *my* intuition :-)
>
> Thanks
>
> Alex.
>
> On 11/06/2019 0
I realize this is a year old...
I have been applying machine learning (Python, Jupyter, numpy et al, keras,
tensorflow on desktop and gradient). However, a lot of my functions are in
LiveCode. Also, I want to make some nice applications for classifiers.
So...
I, too, am interested in what folk
I have been involved in AI and machine learning on and off since I wrote a
paper on modeling learning using linear algebra a half century ago. However,
recently, I have been thrown into the deep learning volcano and am doing the
backstroke in the machine learning lava.
I am wondering...
Has an
is to try to apply some
> simple guesswork to make a "reasonable" looking result, but with a simple way
> (e.g. put TRUE into myArray["NoGuessing"] ) to prevent any such attempt and
> ave a minimal, undecorated graph.
>
> -- Alex.
>
> On 25/04/2019 19:29
Coming in late...
For bread-and-butter code, B.
For software development, A.
But, really, my response is C.
Dar
> On Apr 23, 2019, at 5:01 PM, Alex Tweedly via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> I'm building a library (which I plan to release as Open Source), and I'm
> having troubl
I like the use of an array.
Add the ability to set the default array, allowing named arrays. Or supply base
arrays that one could use to make a plot parameter array.
--
Dar Scott
Mad Scientist
darzLab
> On Apr 23, 2019, at 9:00 PM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> Using named va
101 - 135 of 135 matches
Mail list logo
