Re: Seeking recommendations / suggestions for use of library stacks.

I would agree, but I have become fond of constants, especially in objects where code is similar but need certain things to be different. For instance I have a button bar which opens for edit, creates new form, deletes data, saves data etc. I copy this bar to each of my forms. The code in most

Re: Seeking recommendations / suggestions for use of library stacks.

g stack > "fastJSONlib" > end releaseStack > > note that using "is among" and "is not among" is not optional otherwise you > end up in an infinite loop > > > > - > --- > Greg (pink) Miller > mad, pink and dangerous to code >

Re: Seeking recommendations / suggestions for use of library stacks.

using stack "fastJSONlib" end releaseStack note that using "is among" and "is not among" is not optional otherwise you end up in an infinite loop - --- Greg (pink) Miller mad, pink and dangerous to code -- View this message in context: http://runtime-revolution.

Re: Seeking recommendations / suggestions for use of library stacks.

Thanks Ali, that's a nice idea. But just in case anyone else does the same as me (i.e. copy/paste it without looking too hard :-) : there should NOT be an 'else' clause in there right now it will either set the variable OR do the initialization, when in fact it should do BOTH or

Re: Seeking recommendations / suggestions for use of library stacks.

One simple way to make this slightly nicer would be to make sure all your initialisation happens in a separate handler eg (doLibraryInitialization), and use your script local lock in the libraryStack handler > local sIHaveBeenInitialized > on librarystack > if sIHaveBeenInitialized is empty

Re: Seeking recommendations / suggestions for use of library stacks.

On 5/13/17 6:29 PM, Alex Tweedly via use-livecode wrote: all initialisation would be done in the librarystack handler that handler would also set a script-local variable to avoid repeated initialisation so something like local sIHaveBeenInitialized on librarystack if sIHaveBeenInitialized

Seeking recommendations / suggestions for use of library stacks.

I'm starting to make more use of library stacks (partly because I'm trying to switch away from revIgniter to a CGI-based solution to allow me to do more work & debugging in the IDE). And now I'm looking for best-practice and/or suggestions for how to use library stacks. The not-q

Re: Getting Library Stacks into Memory

Forget it… too long a day.. .I needed another segment my path… sorry for the noise Amazing how hard this is for me… I must be super dense or something is really missing in the docs. OK , so you say we don't need to use "go" to get stacks into memory I have this in my loader stack put (

Re: Getting Library Stacks into Memory

Amazing how hard this is for me… I must be super dense or something is really missing in the docs. OK , so you say we don't need to use "go" to get stacks into memory I have this in my loader stack put ( getPathForSharedLibraries() & "itemMetadataParser.livecodescript") into tMediaParser

Re: Getting Library Stacks into Memory

But LiveCode is not C. In LiveCode an array is a value, not a special kind of variable. put "abcd" into cup 1 of that egg carton in the box labeled "alphabetBlocks" (I know, Dar sees the world funny.) > On Jul 9, 2016, at 1:20 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote:

Re: Getting Library Stacks into Memory

J. Landman Gay wrote: > On 7/9/2016 1:39 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote: >> After all, how does one express an array in English? :) > > "Egg carton". Devin taught me that while brandishing a prop at one of > our teaching sessions. > >put "abcd" into cup 1 of eggcarton "alphabetBlocks"

Re: Getting Library Stacks into Memory

http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Getting-Library-Stacks-into-Memory-tp4706461p4706515.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 su

Re: Getting Library Stacks into Memory

On 7/9/2016 1:39 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote: After all, how does one express an array in English? :) "Egg carton". Devin taught me that while brandishing a prop at one of our teaching sessions. put "abcd" into cup 1 of eggcarton "alphabetBlocks" At first I thought it was some kind of yolk

Re: Getting Library Stacks into Memory

Mark Wieder wrote: > On 07/09/2016 10:13 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote: > >> One might even say it becomes the "parent script" of the control. >> >> If only we had a word to describe that unique role clearly... ;) > > Ah... the problems of trying to set up a one-to-one correspondence > between

Re: Getting Library Stacks into Memory

On 07/09/2016 10:13 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote: One might even say it becomes the "parent script" of the control. If only we had a word to describe that unique role clearly... ;) Ah... the problems of trying to set up a one-to-one correspondence between technical terms and natural language.

Re: Getting Library Stacks into Memory

Mark Wieder wrote: > On 07/08/2016 10:57 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: >> I seem to remember inserting the script of a stack into back at some >> point in the past. > > Probably also worth pointing out here that if you assign a behavior > to a control, the behavior acts as a backscript to that

Re: Getting Library Stacks into Memory

On 07/08/2016 10:57 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: I seem to remember inserting the script of a stack into back at some point in the past. Probably also worth pointing out here that if you assign a behavior to a control, the behavior acts as a backscript to that control. -- Mark Wieder

Re: Getting Library Stacks into Memory

I seem to remember inserting the script of a stack into back at some point in the past. I know for sure you can start using the stack which is effectively the same thing. The main thing is that you don't need to "go" there to load the stack into RAM. Just putting it in use does that, as does

Re: Getting Library Stacks into Memory

On 07/08/2016 12:48 AM, J. Landman Gay wrote: insert the script of the stack into front or back Now *that* would be an interesting addition to the language "...surprise me, Trebek..." -- Mark Wieder ahsoftw...@gmail.com ___ use-livecode

Re: Getting Library Stacks into Memory

Jacque wrote: "insert the script of the stack into front or back" The dictionary implies that this can only be done with an "object" , hence the assumption (probably wrong) that one needs to have the stack open… I assume you mean that we can do it like this now with script only stacks insert

Re: Getting Library Stacks into Memory

Subject: Re: Getting Library Stacks into Memory To: How to use LiveCode <use-livecode@lists.runrev.com<mailto:use-livecode@lists.runrev.com>> These almost sound like undefined errors with the group name as the object hint. Mobile apps can only have one window at a time, and each &q

Re: Getting Library Stacks into Memory

These almost sound like undefined errors with the group name as the object hint. Mobile apps can only have one window at a time, and each "go" replaces the previous window. If you go to an invisible stack you'll see black. In general don't use "go" for that kind of thing, just using the stack

Getting Library Stacks into Memory

Our new app was loading nicely on the iPhone.. .we externalized a lot of code to scripts that are meant to be used in front, back and as behaviors… with the go stack cmd logInfo "Loading frontscript" && tStackPath go stack (getPathForSharedLibraries() & tStackPath) insert the script of

Re: Plain text library stacks - BOM needed

I’ve found that when LiveCode saves the stack script file, it adds a Byte Order Mark (BOM) to denote the file is UTF-8 encoded. If the BOM is not present when you start using such a library stack, the engine will treat it as being natively encoding. I have found that to be true with both the IDE

Plain text library stacks - BOM needed

On 23 Apr 2015, at 15:59, Mark Waddingham m...@livecode.com wrote: You can save the stack in the normal way but the only thing it will save will be the stack script - the file on disk is just a UTF-8 text file. I’ve found that when LiveCode saves the stack script file, it adds a Byte Order

Re: Plain text library stacks

-- View this message in context: http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Fwd-Plain-text-library-stacks-tp4691383p4691608.html Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode

Re: Plain text library stacks

On 2015-04-23 20:41, Michael Doub wrote: Mark, It appears that when you programmatically create a script only stack and save it. The engine auto inserts the first line: script stackname.I see that when I look at the file with a text editor. When I edit the script of the stack in

Re: Plain text library stacks

Ah, I see. Thanks. And may I say, your presence on this list, even if only occasional, is much appreciated. -- Peter Peter M. Brigham pmb...@gmail.com http://home.comcast.net/~pmbrig On Apr 24, 2015, at 2:11 PM, Mark Waddingham wrote: 1. No - substacks are part of the parent stackfile when

Re: Plain text library stacks

1. No - substacks are part of the parent stackfile when on disk so they only make sense as normally saved (binary) stacks. 2. Yes - script only stacks are stacks. The script only part only pertains to the on disk format which is a text file. Sent from my iPhone On 24 Apr 2015, at 19:06,

Re: Plain text library stacks

I just updated the MasterLibrary to allow you to create a Script Only Stack and insert functions and commands with just a few clicks. https://www.dropbox.com/s/3wpwn3hfbmpl7sk/MasterLibrary.livecode?dl=0 -= Mike On 4/23/15 2:58 PM, Thierry Douez wrote: Absolutely, that's what Peter was

Re: Plain text library stacks

Questions about these script-only stacks: 1. can they be made substacks of another stack? 2. can you do start using stack… with them? -- Peter Peter M. Brigham pmb...@gmail.com http://home.comcast.net/~pmbrig On Apr 24, 2015, at 12:41 PM, Michael Doub wrote: I just updated the MasterLibrary

Re: Plain text library stacks

So, script stackname must be at the 1st line of the textfile. Ah yes - that is indeed the case - it is quite picky, for two reasons. The first was that the main use-case I had in mind when implementing it was to replace IDE stacks which were only scripts and thus they would be edited in the

Re: Plain text library stacks

Doesnt' work here with LC 6.7.4 or LC 7.0.4. What exactly isn't working? The feature has actually been in the engine (albeit in nascent form) since around 6.6.4 / 6.6.5 IIRC. I originally hacked it together because of the issues we'd had keeping the core standalone builder stacks for iOS

Re: Plain text library stacks

Hmm, had a blank 1st line and script stackname as the second one. So, script stackname must be at the 1st line of the textfile. And now it works beautifully :) Regards, Thierry 2015-04-23 16:50 GMT+02:00 Mark Waddingham m...@livecode.com: Doesnt' work here with LC 6.7.4 or LC 7.0.4. What

Re: Plain text library stacks

Hi Peter, Which version of LC are you using ? Doesnt' work here with LC 6.7.4 or LC 7.0.4. Thanks, Thierry Thierry Douez - http://sunny-tdz.com Maker of sunnYperl - sunnYmidi - sunnYmage 2015-04-23 15:34 GMT+02:00 Peter W A Wood

Re: Plain text library stacks

That is something to be aware of. The purpose of a script only stack is to be text on disk... Password protection requires binary output, so in that case you might as well just use a normal stack. Mark Sent from my iPhone On 23 Apr 2015, at 17:49, Peter Haworth p...@lcsql.com wrote: Not

Re: Plain text library stacks

Mark, It appears that when you programmatically create a script only stack and save it. The engine auto inserts the first line: script stackname.I see that when I look at the file with a text editor. When I edit the script of the stack in livecode the script stackname line is missing.

Re: Plain text library stacks

I’m curious—can these plain text stacks be used by LC Server just like a regular stack as a library? Devin Devin Asay Office of Digital Humanities Brigham Young University ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit

Re: Plain text library stacks

Absolutely, that's what Peter was showing in his sample code. Regards, Thierry Thierry Douez - http://sunny-tdz.com Maker of sunnYperl - sunnYmidi - sunnYmage 2015-04-23 20:56 GMT+02:00 Devin Asay devin_a...@byu.edu: I’m curious—can these

Re: Plain text library stacks

2015-04-23 18:26 GMT+02:00 Mark Waddingham m...@livecode.com: So, script stackname must be at the 1st line of the textfile. Ah yes - that is indeed the case Thanks Mark for your explanations. In fact, I started by putting some comments in the first lines then dropped them but leaving one

Re: Plain text library stacks

Not sure if this is a problem or not but it appears that any password I set on the stack isn't retained. If I remove the stack from memory and re-open it, the password isn't retained. I guess just something to be aware of rather than a problem. Pete lcSQL Software http://www.lcsql.com Home of

Re: Fwd: Plain text library stacks

On 2015-04-23 07:37, Peter W A Wood wrote: Is it possible to load a Library stack in plan text format from another stack? Yes - although we've not explicitly published details on the feature yet :) However, if you want to play around with it then from the message box try: create script

Re: Plain text library stacks

Many thanks, Mark. On 23 Apr 2015, at 15:59, Mark Waddingham m...@livecode.com wrote: On 2015-04-23 07:37, Peter W A Wood wrote: Is it possible to load a Library stack in plan text format from another stack? Yes - although we've not explicitly published details on the feature yet :)

Re: Plain text library stacks

Great. I can now refactor all those libraries. On Thu, 23 Apr 2015 at 11:44, Peter W A Wood peterwaw...@gmail.com wrote: Many thanks, Mark. On 23 Apr 2015, at 15:59, Mark Waddingham m...@livecode.com wrote: On 2015-04-23 07:37, Peter W A Wood wrote: Is it possible to load a Library

Re: Plain text library stacks

Here is a very simple server script and a very simple “text” library script that show just what I was hoping. The Library Script: script TextLib function TL.compare pFirst, pSecond return pFirst = pSecond end TL.compare The Server Script: #!path

Re: Plain text library stacks

” library stacks. I searched the forum and clicked relevant threads without being able to find the post that I remember. Is it possible to load a Library stack in plan text format from another stack? Peter ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode

Re: Plain text library stacks

to load “plain text” library stacks. I searched the forum and clicked relevant threads without being able to find the post that I remember. Is it possible to load a Library stack in plan text format from another stack? Peter ___ use

Fwd: Plain text library stacks

I remember reading a message to the effect that one of the recent releases to the LiveCode engine included an enhancement to load “plain text” library stacks. I searched the forum and clicked relevant threads without being able to find the post that I remember. Is it possible to load a Library

LiveCode server and library stacks

I'm writing a web service. I'm trying to activate a library stack using this code:(line numbers are included just in email) 15:if there is a file (lib/DB_Library.livecode) then 16: start using stack (lib/DB_Library.livecode) 17:end if the code finds the stack file but it won't start I'm getting

Re: LiveCode server and library stacks

Ralph DiMola wrote: I'm writing a web service. I'm trying to activate a library stack using this code:(line numbers are included just in email) 15:if there is a file (lib/DB_Library.livecode) then 16: start using stack (lib/DB_Library.livecode) 17:end if the code finds the stack file but

RE: LiveCode server and library stacks

-livecode-boun...@lists.runrev.com] On Behalf Of Richard Gaskin Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 8:24 PM To: use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Subject: Re: LiveCode server and library stacks Ralph DiMola wrote: I'm writing a web service. I'm trying to activate a library stack using this code:(line

Re: Library Stacks

I was thinking of using a substack with the visible set to false to store preferences for a standalone. If I am correct you can do this and then not make a standalone out of the substaack and then you are able store them in a custom property. If this is a good approach should I make a new object

Library Stacks

Using a library stack for the first time and wondering the best practices for where to locate it. Application support folder, same folder as the application using it, somewhere else? Pete lcSQL Software http://www.lcsql.com Home of lcStackBrowser http://www.lcsql.com/lcstackbrowser.html and

Re: Library Stacks

On 9/27/2014, 6:31 PM, Peter Haworth wrote: Using a library stack for the first time and wondering the best practices for where to locate it. Application support folder, same folder as the application using it, somewhere else? I always make them substacks. That way they are always available

Re: Best Practice for Library Stacks - Found word(s) list error in the Text body

Not the way you are doing it. Only the STACK script is in the message path. Not every script of every object IN the stack! That being said, you could certainly insert the script of every card of the library stack, but that might be messy. An alternative might be to put all the handlers in the

Re: Best Practice for Library Stacks

this message in context: http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Best-Practice-for-Library-Stacks-tp4675854p4676032.html Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please

Re: Best Practice for Library Stacks - Found word(s) check out in the Text body

What you are calling Scripts are actually Handlers. A Script is the entire chunk of code, containing 0 or more commands and/or functions, which belongs to an object. A handler is everything between and including an on/command/function statement and it’s corresponding end statement. In the

Best Practice for Library Stacks

Hello, I have a library stack which consists all my common functions and commands. Calculations, text manipulation, getting device info, update procedures, etc. Stack’s script is close 5000+ line of code. I wanted to organize it and put related handlers into the script of respective cards.

Re: Best Practice for Library Stacks

Hi Ender, Stacks in use receive messages at stack level, not at card level. Use a button for each part of your library and use backscripts and frontscripts. -- Best regards, Mark Schonewille Economy-x-Talk Consulting and Software Engineering Homepage: http://economy-x-talk.com Twitter:

Re: Best Practice for Library Stacks

m.schonewi...@economy-x-talk.com Date: February 13, 2014 at 13:19:32 To: How to use LiveCode use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Subject:  Re: Best Practice for Library Stacks Hi Ender, Stacks in use receive messages at stack level, not at card level. Use a button for each part of your library

Re: Best Practice for Library Stacks

You can have more Library stacks loaded (via start using) than you can insert back scripts or front scripts. The numbers used to be 50 library stacks and 15 front and 15 back scripts. I am not sure if that has changed with recent releases. This may or may not make a difference for you depending

Re: Best Practice for Library Stacks

Paul Dupuis wrote: You can have more Library stacks loaded (via start using) than you can insert back scripts or front scripts. The numbers used to be 50 library stacks and 15 front and 15 back scripts. I am not sure if that has changed with recent releases. It seems that it has. I'd been

Re: Best Practice for Library Stacks

Ender Nafi wrote: Is there any difference, especially performance-wise, between these two approaches: 1. Library code is in the library stack’s script and it’s activated by _start using stack “libraryCode” 2. Library code is distributed to different buttons of a card of the main stack and

Re: Best Practice for Library Stacks

the handlers contained within a single button? Bill William Prothero http://es.earthednet.org On Feb 13, 2014, at 6:50 AM, Richard Gaskin ambassa...@fourthworld.com wrote: Paul Dupuis wrote: You can have more Library stacks loaded (via start using) than you can insert back scripts or front

Re: Best Practice for Library Stacks

Earthednet-wp wrote: I like the idea of putting libraries into buttons, then copying them into the front script at startup. When you say there is a limit of some number of scripts, what counts for a script? Is a single script counted as all the handlers contained within a single button?

Re: Best Practice for Library Stacks

I couldn’t decide which line to quote from Richard’s posts; You know, because of the 15kb limit of list :) In short, I’ve learned much. For my situation, using library stacks is less convenient. And the possibility of hooking chained behaviors to the backscripts seems very promising. I already

Re: Best Practice for Library Stacks

Richard- Thursday, February 13, 2014, 7:46:16 AM, you wrote: There used to be limits; it remains to be seen if there still are, or if the Dictionary entry for scriptLimits just needs to be updated. Last time I looked in the code, the script limits were commented out. -- -Mark Wieder

Re: Best Practice for Library Stacks

Richard, My question was probably too elementary, but what I was really asking is: Do all of the handlers in a single button script count as a single script, or is a single handler in the button script counted as a script, for purposes of scriptLimits. If only 10 front scripts were allowed, the

Re: Best Practice for Library Stacks

Earthednet-wp wrote: Richard, My question was probably too elementary, but what I was really asking is: Do all of the handlers in a single button script count as a single script, or is a single handler in the button script counted as a script, for purposes of scriptLimits. There was no

Re: Best Practice for Library Stacks

Wasn't the ten lines of 'do' commands a very old demo version thing?... Designed to keep testers from do-ing too much without buying the product? And wasn't it removed long ago? Questions, questions, questions... ~Roger On Feb 13, 2014 12:11 PM, Richard Gaskin ambassa...@fourthworld.com wrote: