Re: Help me understand infinity

I thought that this was already released in LC 9.0.5 https://livecode-blogger.blogspot.com/2019/05/livecode-905-released.html I sure what the use case is for infinity never mind ‘beyond’. Martin > On Jul 29, 2020, at 1:57 PM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode > wrote: > > In the v9.6.1RC1

Re: Help me understand infinity

The bug list is infinite, ergo, all others are secondary to this one. ;) -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com On July 29, 2020 6:13:39 PM Mark Wieder via use-livecode wrote: On 7/29/20 3:17 PM, Ali Lloyd via use-livecode

Re: Help me understand infinity

On 7/29/20 5:31 PM, Brian Milby via use-livecode wrote: This change first appeared in 9.5 DP 1, so it isn’t really new. Right. I don't think anyone accused this change of popping up in the latest release though. -- Mark Wieder ahsoftw...@gmail.com

Re: Help me understand infinity

This change first appeared in 9.5 DP 1, so it isn’t really new. Sent from my iPad > On Jul 29, 2020, at 7:12 PM, Mark Wieder via use-livecode > wrote: > > On 7/29/20 3:17 PM, Ali Lloyd via use-livecode wrote: > >> Now you can do: >> local tMin, tThisResult >> put infinity into tMin >>

Re: Help me understand infinity

On 7/29/20 3:17 PM, Ali Lloyd via use-livecode wrote: Now you can do: local tMin, tThisResult put infinity into tMin repeat for each element tElement in tList -- perform some computation on tElement to get tThisResult put min(tMin, tThisResult) into tMin end repeat Well, yes, that's

Re: Help me understand infinity

I wonder if I can persuade the team to let me add a constant for the first uncountable strongly inaccessible cardinal. Regarding use-cases, I like the following one which is implicit in the above observations about comparisons between infinity and integers. Previously I would do the following a

Re: Help me understand infinity

On 29/07/2020 20:17, Dr. Hawkins wrote: On Jul 29, 2020, at 12:08 PM, Alex Tweedly via use-livecode mailto:use-livecode@lists.runrev.com>> wrote: Any number compared to positive infinity (other than itself) *will* be less than it. Bah, *ℵ*_2 > floating point infinity (which is *ℵ*_1 )

Re: Help me understand infinity

On 7/29/20 12:17 PM, Dr. Hawkins via use-livecode wrote: Bah, ℵ2> floating point infinity (which is ℵ1) Outside of the axiom of choice (or actually even with it) that's not something provable. OTOH, Kant's proofs of aleph null and aleph one are brilliant. -- Mark Wieder

Re: Help me understand infinity

On 7/29/20 12:08 PM, Alex Tweedly via use-livecode wrote: On 29/07/2020 18:57, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote: In the v9.6.1RC1 Release Notes there's this:    Infinity constant    The constant infinity has been added to the language in this release.    As a result, theunquoted literal

Re: Help me understand infinity

On Jul 29, 2020, at 12:08 PM, Alex Tweedly via use-livecode wrote: > > Any number compared to positive infinity (other than itself) *will* be less > than it. Bah, ℵ2> floating point infinity (which is ℵ1) (I took that class from Halmos himself . . .) — Richard E. Hawkins, Esq. The

Re: Help me understand infinity

On 29/07/2020 18:57, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote: In the v9.6.1RC1 Release Notes there's this:    Infinity constant    The constant infinity has been added to the language in this release.    As a result, theunquoted literal infinity is now reserved. Any    existing uses of it should

Re: When me is not me

It is this sort of thing which inspired me to start using long id's for everything whenever I make calls to cards or stacks not the one I am currently on. That is why I created getParentCard() and getParentStack(). I then pass the local long id of the callign object to whatever script I am

Re: When me is not me

It certainly sounds like it to me... On Sat, 10 Mar 2018 at 17:05, Brian Milby wrote: > Ali, he was doing the former. So could this actually be a bug? > On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 6:17 AM Ali Lloyd via use-livecode < > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > >> In theory that

Re: When me is not me

Ali, he was doing the former. So could this actually be a bug? On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 6:17 AM Ali Lloyd via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > In theory that shouldn't be the problem - `the of me` should > short-circuit to directly evaluating the property of the object with

Re: When me is not me

In theory that shouldn't be the problem - `the of me` should short-circuit to directly evaluating the property of the object with the behavior, rather than evaluating `me` as a name first. This is why `put the long id of me into tID` also works. Peter, in your original script are you doing set

Re: When me is not me

I think I know what is going on. If you add a couple of put statements to that script you will find that "me" by itself doesn't include the card or stack. So "put me" would give something like [group "Language Choice"] which isn't specific enough from another card. This works: local tID put

Re: When me is not me

Yes, it works great if you are on the card, not if you are somewhere else. > On Mar 9, 2018, at 6:03 PM, Mike Bonner via use-livecode > wrote: > > Nevermind. Another card. DOH > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 6:59 PM, Mike Bonner wrote: > >>

Re: When me is not me

Nevermind. Another card. DOH On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 6:59 PM, Mike Bonner wrote: > What version? Its working for me in 9 dp11 by using either dispatch or > send to the group. > > In the group: > command doit pbtn >set the hilitedbutton of me to pbtn > end doit > > And

Re: When me is not me

What version? Its working for me in 9 dp11 by using either dispatch or send to the group. In the group: command doit pbtn set the hilitedbutton of me to pbtn end doit And from the message box.. send ("doit" && 2) to group 1 or dispatch "doit" to group 1 with 3 On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 6:23

Re: Help me test Levure

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 9:00 AM AndyP via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > Hi Trevor, > > All installed and working as documented..excellent work. > > Windows 10 , LC 8.4 Great. Thanks Andy. -- Trevor DeVore > ___ use-livecode

Re: Help me test Levure

Hi Trevor, All installed and working as documented..excellent work. Windows 10 , LC 8.4 - Andy Piddock My software never has bugs. It just develops random features. TinyIDE a Free alternative minimalist IDE Plugin for LiveCode TinyIDE Script editor Themer for LC http://2108.co.uk

Re: Help me test Levure

Probably not: I have never tried: but it is a fairly antiquated system. Richmond. On 6/10/17 10:58 pm, Trevor DeVore via use-livecode wrote: On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 2:54 PM Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: Mac OS 10.7.5 At stage 5. Package

Re: Help me test Levure

On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 3:25 PM, panagiotis merakos via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > In LC 8.1.4 (as this is the case starting from LC 8.1.2 IIRC) you need at > least OSX 10.10 to build iOS standalones. > Well that explains it. Thanks for the info Panos. --

Re: Help me test Levure

Hi all, In LC 8.1.4 (as this is the case starting from LC 8.1.2 IIRC) you need at least OSX 10.10 to build iOS standalones. Best, Panos -- On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 8:58 PM, Trevor DeVore via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 2:54 PM Richmond

Re: Help me test Levure

On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 2:54 PM Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > Mac OS 10.7.5 > > At stage 5. Package Application. > > Put this |levurePackageApplication "release" in to the > Message Box and got a number of rapidly flashing grey windows followed by >

Re: Help me test Levure

Mac OS 10.7.5 At stage 5. Package Application. Put this |levurePackageApplication "release" in to the Message Box and got a number of rapidly flashing grey windows followed by a dialogue saying "could not compile application class" I clicked on the "OK' btn: in /builds/release/0.0.1-1 I found

Re: Help me test Levure

Trevor, I'm very interested in this. I'm on the road for a week, but will download and test it as soon as I get settled. Best, Bill P William Prothero http://es.earthednet.org > On Jun 10, 2017, at 9:35 AM, Trevor DeVore via use-livecode > wrote: > > On Sat,

Re: Help me test Levure

On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 11:33 AM, Trevor DeVore wrote: > I have a test that I would like as many people as possible to run. If you > could take a few minutes to try it out and report back that would be great. > BTW, I forgot to mention that the test should be done

Re: "this me" vs "me"

Ah, very good. so this goes to the method of dynamically setting behaviros run time. "cool!" On April 5, 2016 at 5:49:23 PM, Scott Rossi (sc...@tactilemedia.com) wrote: Using "this me" gets you the long id of the object (button/stack) serving as a control's

Re: "this me" vs "me"

Using "this me" gets you the long id of the object (button/stack) serving as a control's behavior. Using "me" by itself gets you the long id of the control the behavior is assigned to. Regards, Scott Rossi Creative Director Tactile Media, UX/UI Design On 4/5/16, 7:34 PM, "use-livecode on

Re: Grab Me Fails on snapshot Images of fields which are transparent (opaque false)

Scott… you are a jewel.. thanks. this worked great! I used white that way I can do anything in the background Confirmed on desktop (mouse) mobile (drag with finger) SCOTT ROSSI WROTE: > 1) Export your tile images from a group that includes a graphic behind the > field set to 1% opacity of the

Re: Grab Me Fails on snapshot Images of fields which are transparent (opaque false)

"grab me" works on any part of transparent fields .. even when clicking on the transparent part of the field… can you just use all fields? Mac 10.10.5 LC 7.1.1 be well, randy Randy Hengst www.classroomFocusedSoftware.com > On Feb 5, 2016, at 11:51 PM, Scott Rossi

Re: Grab Me Fails on snapshot Images of fields which are transparent (opaque false)

You're correct -- anywhere the image is 100% transparent will not respond to click/touch. Here are a couple of workarounds: 1) Export your tile images from a group that includes a graphic behind the field set to 1% opacity of the main color that appears where your tiles will be placed (white is

Re: Grab Me Fails on snapshot Images of fields which are transparent (opaque false)

Maybe snapshot with a file type that doesn't have an alpha channel? On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 9:25 PM, Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami wrote: > > I have a puzzle widget that is made by importing a snapshot of a field > with words in it, then we make a copy of that images and

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Kay C Lan lan.kc.macm...@gmail.com wrote: Sorry Geoff I just don't follow your logic. Just because one doesn't exist why shouldn't the others? If I understand your logic, which clearly I don't, you are suggesting that because LC can create and count multiple

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Thanks for the Link, an excellent discussion. Marks Waddingham's statement: If you want to be able to represent a nullable string list of any number of empty items from 0 is like saying: If you want to be able to represent a nullable array of any number of empty keys from 0 ??? If you put

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Wouldn't this mean that: the number of items of test -- puts zero And by extension: the number of words of test -- puts zero the number of lines of test -- puts zero Sent from my iPad On Aug 14, 2013, at 7:03 AM, Kay C Lan lan.kc.macm...@gmail.com wrote: If you put empty into an

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Kay C Lan lan.kc.macm...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the Link, an excellent discussion. Marks Waddingham's statement: If you want to be able to represent a nullable string list of any number of empty items from 0 is like saying: If you want to be able to represent a nullable array of any

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Geoff Canyon gcan...@gmail.com wrote: Wouldn't this mean that: the number of items of test -- puts zero And by extension: the number of words of test -- puts zero the number of lines of test -- puts zero . And the number of items in empty is one. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

that will cause me to re-evaluate my assumptions. What I've settled on here is a simple alternative that provides a more logical (IMO) way of describing items in a string and doesn't change the body of legacy code. I think it's important to think about implementing this now that we're at a critical

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Sorry Geoff I just don't follow your logic. Just because one doesn't exist why shouldn't the others? If I understand your logic, which clearly I don't, you are suggesting that because LC can create and count multiple empty lines, and create and count multiple empty items, it should be able to

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

On 8/14/13 7:51 PM, Kay C Lan wrote: Mark's suggested addition seems a win win to me, it gives the option to count items differently and I don't have to do anything ;-) But do keep reading the forum thread, as runrevmark has pointed out some issues with it that could cause trouble with

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

On 8/13/13 9:01 PM, Kay C Lan wrote: Now I don't want to have LC behave that way, I like the fact that LC recognises 1,2,3 as a 3 item list, I just wish it would be logical enough to recognise ,2, as a 3 item list with 2 empty items. Mark Waddingham explains much better than I did why things

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

On 12/08/2013, at 03:17 PM, Mark Wieder wrote: Terry- Sunday, August 11, 2013, 8:54:28 PM, you wrote: I agree with Mark that there are four lines there. The last one just happens to be empty. Terry... I do think that's a matter of semantics of the visual display, though, and

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Terry- Sunday, August 11, 2013, 11:04:26 PM, you wrote: Agreed - for practical purposes it's only 3 - although I still can't get out of the habit of deleting the trailing delimiter from a constructed list before processing it in a repeat loop. I do too. And for that reason, neither of us

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

On Aug 12, 2013, at 10:51 AM, Mark Wieder wrote: Terry- Sunday, August 11, 2013, 11:04:26 PM, Terry Judd wrote: Agreed - for practical purposes it's only 3 - although I still can't get out of the habit of deleting the trailing delimiter from a constructed list before processing it in a

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Devin- Monday, August 12, 2013, 10:30:29 AM, you wrote: You know how I get rid of trailing delimiters? put line 1 to -1 of tList into tList put item 1 to -1 of tItems into tItems Kills that dang dangling delimiter dead. Good one. I just opt for the chomp approach repeat while item

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Mark, That won't work because LC won't recognize the last item as empty. Thus put a, into goop delete item -1 of goop put goop will end up putting empty. I really want to fix this thing. On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Mark Wieder mwie...@ahsoftware.net wrote: Devin- Monday, August 12,

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Mike- Monday, August 12, 2013, 11:11:31 AM, you wrote: Mark, That won't work because Yep. Typing without thinking on my end. Need. More. Coffee. -- -Mark Wieder mwie...@ahsoftware.net ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Another way: if char -1 of tList is the itemdelimiter then delete char -1 of tList For short lists, item 1 to -1 is faster. For long lists the above gets to be perhaps 5x faster. On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Devin Asay devin_a...@byu.edu wrote: On Aug 12, 2013, at 10:51 AM, Mark

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Geoff, I haven't messed with it, but does last char have the same performance as char -1? On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Geoff Canyon gcan...@gmail.com wrote: Another way: if char -1 of tList is the itemdelimiter then delete char -1 of tList For short lists, item 1 to -1 is faster.

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Just did a quick test with 1m lines getting the last char of each (for each line loop) using -1 and last, last is faster. 266 milliseconds for last char.. and 318 for char -1 On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Mike Kerner mikeker...@roadrunner.comwrote: Geoff, I haven't messed with it, but does

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Here's what I've ended up with. Thanks to everyone for all the discussion. I think it's a pretty elegant solution, doesn't change any existing scripts, and avoids conflicting stack properties. http://forums.runrev.com/viewtopic.php?f=66t=16383p=82961#p82961 -- -Mark Wieder

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 3:06 PM, Mike Bonner bonnm...@gmail.com wrote: Just did a quick test with 1m lines getting the last char of each (for each line loop) using -1 and last, last is faster. 266 milliseconds for last char.. and 318 for char -1 Confirmed here. In my test I was getting

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

On 8/11/13 4:30 PM, Kay C Lan wrote: On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 3:34 AM, J. Landman Gay jac...@hyperactivesw.comwrote: When you think of it that way, it all falls into place. Not really. In the Message Box: put 1,1,3,2,1,4 into tStore put tStore into msg put empty into item -1 of tStore put cr

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 2:47 PM, J. Landman Gay jac...@hyperactivesw.comwrote: Lines are easier to grok: This is line 1 cr -- cr is part of line 1 This is line 2 cr -- cr is part of line 2 This is line 3 cr -- cr is part of line 3 Yeah but if you put that text into a scrolling field then

RE: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

From: Peter Haworth On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 2:47 PM, J. Landman Gay jac...@hyperactivesw.comwrote: Lines are easier to grok: This is line 1 cr -- cr is part of line 1 This is line 2 cr -- cr is part of line 2 This is line 3 cr -- cr is part of line 3 Yeah but if you put that

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Paul- Sunday, August 11, 2013, 4:20:35 PM, you wrote: I wonder if anyone actually relies on that ability. If not, perhaps THAT should be changed, since it appears to be the one glaring inconsistency that can't be resolved by looking at things differently. Jacque has pointed out on the web

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Jacque- Sunday, August 11, 2013, 2:47:18 PM, you wrote: This is line 1 cr -- cr is part of line 1 This is line 2 cr -- cr is part of line 2 Here are three items: item 1, item 2, item 3, They work the same way. Yes, and with the same problems. The problems occur when you have a

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

I still like Mark's idea of having a global property. There are a lot of us that started using HC wy back before v. 2.1 came along. Some have legacy stacks that we don't want to change (See Jacque) and some of us have no qualms fixing any lingering issues that might come up

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Mike- Sunday, August 11, 2013, 5:57:12 PM, you wrote: I still like Mark's idea of having a global property. I think Monte's right in that it makes more sense to make this a stack property rather than a global property. That way existing stacks don't have to be changed but you can make new

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

On 12/08/2013, at 10:57 AM, Mike Kerner wrote: A global property lets everyone do it their own way. No it doesn't. What if you want to use one of Jacque's plugins? That's why I suggested a stack property just like HCAddressing... HCChunkBehavior or HCDelimiterCounting are my favourite

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Mark Wieder wrote: 1,2,3 -- this contains three items 1,2,3, -- this contains three items 1,2,3, -- this contains four items Let's look at those strings from the point of view of what we might presume was that of the HyperTalk design team, but besting them by using Jacque's suggestion of

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Richard- Sunday, August 11, 2013, 6:22:47 PM, you wrote: x|x|x -- this contains three items x|x|x| -- this contains three items unless, of course, the trailing space is considered part of the string, in which case that last line has four items. x|x|x|x -- this contains four items The

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Mark Wieder wrote: Richard- Sunday, August 11, 2013, 6:22:47 PM, you wrote: x|x|x -- this contains three items x|x|x| -- this contains three items unless, of course, the trailing space is considered part of the string, in which case that last line has four items. x|x|x|x -- this

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

On 8/11/13 7:35 PM, Mark Wieder wrote: Yes, and with the same problems. The problems occur when you have a situation like This is line 1 cr This is line 2 crcr -- there are still only two lines The engine says that's 3 lines, which is consistent with final terminators. 1,2,3 -- this

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

On 8/11/13 8:22 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote: One simple solution would be to add lineTerminator and itemTerminator as synonyms for lineDelimiter and itemDelimiter respectively, and then the conceptual model fits what the engine does. We leave the *delimter tokens in place for us ol' timers, but

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Monte, Mark, Yes, I think I like a stack/script property better, too. Great idea. Jacque and Richard... So you're basically thinking we should change words, not the behavior? Why not just change the documentation, then? In the meantime, if the behavior is to be left alone, there are a variety

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Jacque- Sunday, August 11, 2013, 7:25:47 PM, you wrote: put this is line 1 cr into field 1 put this is line 2 cr cr after field 1 put the number of lines in field 1 -- but there are actually four lines in field 1. -- -Mark Wieder mwie...@ahsoftware.net

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Mike Kerner wrote: Jacque and Richard... So you're basically thinking we should change words, not the behavior? Why not just change the documentation, then? In the meantime, if the behavior is to be left alone, there are a variety of functions (especially the database functions) that have to

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

On 8/11/13 9:55 PM, Mike Kerner wrote: Also remember that text editors don't behave this way, either. Empty CR's at the end of a line still trigger a page break. That seems far more correct than having to figure out of a delimiter/terminator should be significant or not. Empty crs in

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Mark Wieder wrote: Jacque- Sunday, August 11, 2013, 7:25:47 PM, you wrote: put this is line 1 cr into field 1 put this is line 2 cr cr after field 1 put the number of lines in field 1 -- but there are actually four lines in field 1. With x as data and | as the terminator, the above gives

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

On 8/11/13 10:10 PM, Mark Wieder wrote: Jacque- Sunday, August 11, 2013, 7:25:47 PM, you wrote: put this is line 1 cr into field 1 put this is line 2 cr cr after field 1 put the number of lines in field 1 -- but there are actually four lines in field 1. No, there's only three lines, but

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

On 8/11/13 10:33 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: On 8/11/13 10:10 PM, Mark Wieder wrote: Jacque- Sunday, August 11, 2013, 7:25:47 PM, you wrote: put this is line 1 cr into field 1 put this is line 2 cr cr after field 1 put the number of lines in field 1 -- but there are actually four lines in

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Jacque- Sunday, August 11, 2013, 8:33:19 PM, you wrote: No, there's only three lines, but the insertion point is placed after the text, where the next potential line will start. OK. Got it. -- -Mark Wieder mwie...@ahsoftware.net ___

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

On 12/08/2013, at 01:33 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: On 8/11/13 10:10 PM, Mark Wieder wrote: Jacque- Sunday, August 11, 2013, 7:25:47 PM, you wrote: put this is line 1 cr into field 1 put this is line 2 cr cr after field 1 put the number of lines in field 1 -- but there are actually

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Richard- Sunday, August 11, 2013, 7:19:23 PM, you wrote: Exactly. I was just being kind to the ol' timers. :) LOL. -- -Mark Wieder mwie...@ahsoftware.net ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Terry- Sunday, August 11, 2013, 8:54:28 PM, you wrote: I agree with Mark that there are four lines there. The last one just happens to be empty. Terry... I do think that's a matter of semantics of the visual display, though, and that's a different thing from the mechanics of how items,

Re: this me?

On Aug 10, 2013 1:03 AM, Mark Wieder wrote: if this me is johnny_depp then talk_like_a_pirate -- -Mark Wieder mwie...@ahsoftware.net if this me is nicholas_cage then switch (which_character) case default talk_like_nicholas_cage break end switch end if

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

Mike- Opened for discussion at http://forums.runrev.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=66t=16383 -- -Mark Wieder mwie...@ahsoftware.net ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage

Re: Handling of final delimter (was Re: this me?)

This seems like something the new language parser could fix for you. Sent from my iPad On Aug 8, 2013, at 7:30 PM, Mike Kerner mikeker...@roadrunner.com wrote: I know I'm stuck with it, but I wish there was a preference that I could tick. ___

Re: this me?

On Aug 8, 2013, at 5:25 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: On 8/8/13 6:13 PM, Monte Goulding wrote: Are you saying that implementing this me wasn't one of those times? It was a very clever ploy to force us all to have this discussion I think ;-) You want to know what's really weird? The more we

Re: this me?

On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 10:38 AM, Devin Asay devin_a...@byu.edu wrote: On Aug 8, 2013, at 5:25 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: On 8/8/13 6:13 PM, Monte Goulding wrote: Are you saying that implementing this me wasn't one of those times? It was a very clever ploy to force us all to have this

Re: this me?

On 8/9/13 1:06 PM, Geoff Canyon wrote: On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 10:38 AM, Devin Asay devin_a...@byu.edu wrote: On Aug 8, 2013, at 5:25 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: On 8/8/13 6:13 PM, Monte Goulding wrote: Are you saying that implementing this me wasn't one of those times? It was a very clever

Re: this me?

On Aug 9, 2013, at 12:22 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: On 8/9/13 1:06 PM, Geoff Canyon wrote: On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 10:38 AM, Devin Asay devin_a...@byu.edu wrote: On Aug 8, 2013, at 5:25 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: On 8/8/13 6:13 PM, Monte Goulding wrote: Are you saying that implementing

Re: this me?

On 8/9/13 1:41 PM, Devin Asay wrote: On Aug 9, 2013, at 12:22 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: On 8/9/13 1:06 PM, Geoff Canyon wrote: On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 10:38 AM, Devin Asay devin_a...@byu.edu wrote: On Aug 8, 2013, at 5:25 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: On 8/8/13 6:13 PM, Monte Goulding wrote:

Re: this me?

at least no one has suggested that me thisAWayThatAWay me meme you miniMe or, my all time favorite doReMi On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 2:49 PM, J. Landman Gay jac...@hyperactivesw.comwrote: On 8/9/13 1:41 PM, Devin Asay wrote: On Aug 9, 2013, at 12:22 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: On 8/9/13 1:06

Re: this me?

[if activated] do re me - the new, engine-based replacement for Shakobox music playing. stop me - Please! Devin Devin Asay Office of Digital Humanities Brigham Young University ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please

Re: this me?

On Aug 9, 2013, at 1:11 PM, Mike Kerner wrote: at least no one has suggested that me thisAWayThatAWay me meme you miniMe or, my all time favorite doReMi That's only because our emails crossed enroute. Wait for it! :) Devin Asay Office of Digital Humanities Brigham Young University

Re: this me?

NICE - I see we had a couple of matches. That. Would. Be. Bad. On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Devin Asay devin_a...@byu.edu wrote: On Aug 9, 2013, at 1:11 PM, Mike Kerner wrote: at least no one has suggested that me thisAWayThatAWay me meme you miniMe or, my all time

Re: this me?

if Sybil is true then set this me to Margie Of course Sybil was never true. Michael ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:

Re: this me?

Michael- Friday, August 9, 2013, 4:34:33 PM, you wrote: if Sybil is true then set this me to Margie Of course Sybil was never true. Michael I think this me is read-only, so attempting to set it will only cause consternation. Continue to talk amongst yourself. -- -Mark Wieder

Re: this me?

On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Mark Wieder mwie...@ahsoftware.net wrote: if Sybil is true then set this me to Margie Of course Sybil was never true. Michael I think this me is read-only, so attempting to set it will only cause consternation. Continue to talk amongst yourself. this

Re: this me?

Not a problem if Sybil is true then if this me is margie then talk_like_margie else if this me is ruthie then talk_like_ruthie . . . else cash_in_from_scam end if end if On Aug 9, 2013, at 6:42 PM, Mark Wieder mwie...@ahsoftware.net wrote: Michael- Friday, August

Re: this me?

Michael- Friday, August 9, 2013, 7:25:49 PM, you wrote: Not a problem if Sybil is true then if this me is margie then talk_like_margie else if this me is ruthie then talk_like_ruthie . . . if this me is johnny_depp then talk_like_a_pirate -- -Mark Wieder

Re: this me?

This is an interesting discussion. For my 2 cents worth, I'm currently in favor of 'the effective behavior of me' but I'm curious why it's needed. What circumstances require a means of determining the control that provides the behavior script? Since behaviors were introduced, I've always

Re: this me?

On Aug 8, 2013, at 9:01 AM, Timothy Bleiler wrote: So, to the extent that it might effect preferences for the syntax, what are some examples of how this would be used? Too early in the morning. Just to be clear and avoid prosecution by the grammar police - to the extent that it might AFFECT

Re: this me?

The effective behavior in no way implies B or A when reading it. To me, anyway, it implies the script, not the container or the container's name. Jacque, I would LOVE to discuss fixing the bizarre way empty last items are treated, starting with either having a preference to modify the behavior,

Re: this me?

Timothy Bleiler wrote: This is an interesting discussion. For my 2 cents worth, I'm currently in favor of 'the effective behavior of me' but I'm curious why it's needed. FWIW I find myself leaning toward scriptObject because it's the least like anything else in the language, and needing

Re: this me?

On Aug 8, 2013, at 9:44 AM, Mike Kerner wrote: The effective behavior in no way implies B or A when reading it. To me, anyway, it implies the script, not the container or the container's name. Yes, it seems to have a more narrow application than some of the other suggestions. I can see how

  1   2   3   >