Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

Andre: > I like verbose code that is full of comments. Ah yes, comments are good! But comments do not make code verbose. Terse code can be heavily commented, and vice versa. Commenting is not closely related to my issue, nor perhaps to yours. Me: > But there's an even bigger danger than the

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

candidate for breaking it up into smaller functions. As for the shadowing problem on the codebase I’m working, it is not really by design, it is how the code evolved. Mistakes were made, and now we’re all fixing them. It is just a good example how an attempt of RegEx based refactoring failed because

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

For my part, I call a function and put the result into a variable. I try not to nest fucntions because I cannot easily tell what the result of each function is, making it harder to troubleshoot, and also to read my own code! For that reason my code is fairly verbose. Bob S > On Apr 14,

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

On 14/04/2021 21:01, Ralph DiMola via use-livecode wrote: Good question... I'm thinking it's the same reason that with strict compilation enabled a variable in a repeat loop does not have to be declared as a script local. If it is declared as a script local no shadow error occurs. A handler

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

Me: >> The biggest code is the most repetitive and least modular! Jacqueline: > Not always, but often. I try to aim for the smallest code base, > so I think the contest should be to solve a complex problem > with the least amount of code. Yes, but not brevity for its own sake! Rather for

RE: On the dangers of automated refactoring

...@lists.runrev.com] On Behalf Of Alex Tweedly via use-livecode Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2021 3:39 PM To: use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Cc: Alex Tweedly Subject: Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring On 14/04/2021 10:23, Andre Garzia via use-livecode wrote: > That is the main issue, the c

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

On 14/04/2021 10:23, Andre Garzia via use-livecode wrote: That is the main issue, the code was using the wrong hungarian-lite prefixes. You’d see something like on myHandler pDataA … end myHandler But, lo and behold, on top of the script there would be something like local

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

On 4/13/21 4:07 PM, Curry Kenworthy via use-livecode wrote: The biggest code is the most repetitive and least modular! Not always, but often. I try to aim for the smallest code base, so I think the contest should be to solve a complex problem with the least amount of code. -- Jacqueline

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

Thanks Andre I enjoyed putting the library together though at the time unit testing and LiveCode just don’t go together. Personally I find developing with tests gives me peace of mind about my code. As for refactoring, normally defined as the process of improving code without changing it’s

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

That is the main issue, the code was using the wrong hungarian-lite prefixes. You’d see something like on myHandler pDataA … end myHandler But, lo and behold, on top of the script there would be something like local pDataA Now, is that an argument to a handler? a script-local? It

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

Safety boots are a must for developing safe code. > On 13 Apr 2021, at 16:48, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode > wrote: > > It's nothing short of a miracle that the shot didn't go INTO your foot. :-) > > Bob S > > >> On Apr 13, 2021, at 03:05 , Andre Garzia via use-livecode >> wrote: >> >>

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

> On 13 Apr 2021, at 16:28, Mark Wieder via use-livecode > wrote: > > Ouch. Don't do that. I agree, that was not my decision. I maintaining this code but I’m not the original developer. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

Andre: > Often in LiveCode (and most programming languages to be honest) > we go coding for a long while and then realise that our code > need extensive refactoring. We may have repeated a pattern over > and over again and discovered that we need to change every > i

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

On 4/13/2021 2:39 PM, Mark Wieder via use-livecode wrote: On 4/13/21 8:37 AM, Paul Dupuis via use-livecode wrote: I find revRefactor (which adds a Refactoring sub-menu under the Edit menu of the IDE Script Editor) to be a tool that I personally would like to see better integrated into the IDE

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

On 4/13/2021 12:06 PM, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode wrote: How do you find that? Github? Don't remember how I found it - I think an announcement by Mark to the list, but, yup, Github: https://github.com/mwieder/revRefactor ___ use-livecode

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

On 4/13/21 9:48 AM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote: Andre Garzia wrote: > What I didn’t realise was that there was variable shadowing happening > in which handler arguments were named with the same name as script- > local variables, my smart replacing removed those arguments because

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

On 4/13/21 8:37 AM, Paul Dupuis via use-livecode wrote: I find revRefactor (which adds a Refactoring sub-menu under the Edit menu of the IDE Script Editor) to be a tool that I personally would like to see better integrated into the IDE. Paul - thanks for the kind words there. I took most

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

It was actually more the mis-application of Hungarian-lite. I think it compiled with strict enabled. Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 13, 2021, at 12:50 PM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode > wrote: > > Andre Garzia wrote: > > > What I didn’t realise was that there was variable shadowing

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

Andre Garzia wrote: > What I didn’t realise was that there was variable shadowing happening > in which handler arguments were named with the same name as script- > local variables, my smart replacing removed those arguments because > there was no need to redeclare the script-local vars. I didn’t

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

How do you find that? Github? Bob S > On Apr 13, 2021, at 08:59 , Paul Dupuis via use-livecode > wrote: > > On 4/13/2021 11:52 AM, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode wrote: >> We should have a contest: Who has the biggest code base. Mine's pretty big, >> but I doubt it's the biggest.:-) >> > ~

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

On 4/13/2021 11:52 AM, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode wrote: We should have a contest: Who has the biggest code base. Mine's pretty big, but I doubt it's the biggest.:-) ~ 83,000 lines of Livecode script, not counting 3rd party library stacks (Wordlib, Spreadlib, lclSpell, ChartMaker) and some

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

We should have a contest: Who has the biggest code base. Mine's pretty big, but I doubt it's the biggest. :-) Bob S > On Apr 13, 2021, at 03:48 , David Bovill via use-livecode > wrote: > > I’d be interested to understand the nature of the gazillion stack project to > see how it compares to

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

It's nothing short of a miracle that the shot didn't go INTO your foot. :-) Bob S > On Apr 13, 2021, at 03:05 , Andre Garzia via use-livecode > wrote: > > Let me tell you folks a recent story in which I tried to do exactly that and > shot myself on the foot.

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

I find revRefactor (which adds a Refactoring sub-menu under the Edit menu of the IDE Script Editor) to be a tool that I personally would like to see better integrated into the IDE. This plugin was done by Mark Wieder and is not an official part of the LiveCode IDE, but it is one place, I would

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

On 4/13/21 3:05 AM, Andre Garzia via use-livecode wrote: What I didn’t realise was that there was variable shadowing happening in which handler arguments were named with the same name as script-local variables Ouch. Don't do that. I end up spending most of my coding life refactoring

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

o comment on is about the kernel of the > activity that was mentioned there: refactoring. > > Often in LiveCode (and most programming languages to be honest) we go coding > for a long while and then realise that our code need extensive refactoring. > We may have repeated a pattern over a

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

I can't speak for others, but I can personally vouch for the authenticity of that statement  On 2021-04-13, 12:12 PM, "use-livecode on behalf of Andre Garzia via use-livecode" wrote: I bet many here never used a unit testing library. ___

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

Peter, This is neat! I also have a small test library, but mine is way less complete than yours. I never released it because it was quite incomplete. Maybe writing a tutorial or doing a small screencast showing it working might help people understand why it is important. I bet many here never

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

Hi Andre > On 13 Apr 2021, at 18:05, Andre Garzia via use-livecode > wrote: > > We don’t even have unit testing libraries so that we can make sure our code > works as expected. I published a simple unit testing library on GitHub but it din’t get any traction -

Re: On the dangers of automated refactoring

Hence the value of crowd-funding a version of the LiveCode language for the Graalvm. I spend a great deal of my time in LiveCode refactoring and renaming handlers. I’ve done this not so much because it is useful to my productivity, but because I see a method in the madness of spaghetti code

On the dangers of automated refactoring

Hi Folks, I’ve recently read that long thread that almost got people banned and will not comment on it. What I want to comment on is about the kernel of the activity that was mentioned there: refactoring. Often in LiveCode (and most programming languages to be honest) we go coding for a long

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

On 3/22/19 4:28 AM, Richmond via use-livecode wrote: That presumably means that people can clone that and fiddle about with it themselves there rather than just on their desktops. OR: it could mean that the intention is, eventually, to integrate this into the LC IDE as a permanent feature.

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

That presumably means that people can clone that and fiddle about with it themselves there rather than just on their desktops. OR: it could mean that the intention is, eventually, to integrate this into the LC IDE as a permanent feature. Richmond. On 22.03.19 г. 9:09 ч., hh via use-livecode

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

> Mark Wieder wrote: > Thanks to a suggestion from Mikey, the refactor plugin has been removed > from SampleStacks/LiveCodeShare and now lives at > https://github.com/mwieder/revRefactor What's the purpose of such a move? ___ use-livecode mailing list

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

On 3/21/19 7:42 PM, Robert Brenstein via use-livecode wrote: Wow! Which versions of LiveCode is this baby compatible with? The LC8 and LC9 series. Before that the IDE doesn't have proper hooks or the subscribe mechanism to support the plugin mechanics. -- Mark Wieder ahsoftw...@gmail.com

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

Wow! Which versions of LiveCode is this baby compatible with? On 20 Mar 2019, at 18:45, Mark Wieder via use-livecode wrote: Announcing (60 days until the San Jose conference): Script Editor Refactor Plugin Brings refactoring support to the LiveCode Script Editor. Place the plugin

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

On 3/21/19 8:51 AM, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode wrote: And another. Find Orphans flags all the values as unused constants in a constant declaration. Example: constant cExcludedWords = "inc,incorporated,corp,corporation,co,comp,company,llc,llp,ltd" produces a flag for "inc" "Incorporated"

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

On 3/21/19 3:41 AM, AndyP via use-livecode wrote: This is outstanding..what a contribution to the community. Found one problem though.. No close/dismiss button. Thanks. fixed on github. -- Mark Wieder

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

Thanks to a suggestion from Mikey, the refactor plugin has been removed from SampleStacks/LiveCodeShare and now lives at https://github.com/mwieder/revRefactor -- Mark Wieder ahsoftw...@gmail.com ___ use-livecode mailing list

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

And another. Find Orphans flags all the values as unused constants in a constant declaration. Example: constant cExcludedWords = "inc,incorporated,corp,corporation,co,comp,company,llc,llp,ltd" produces a flag for "inc" "Incorporated" etc. Bob S > On Mar 21, 2019, at 03:41 , AndyP via

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

This is outstanding..what a contribution to the community. Found one problem though.. No close/dismiss button. - Andy Piddock My software never has bugs. It just develops random features. TinyIDE

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

this is just TOO AWESOME One of the things I always complained is the lack of refactoring support. Thanks a ton my friend. On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 2:48 AM Mark Wieder via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > On 3/20/19 2:53 PM, Mark Wieder via use-livec

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

On 3/20/19 2:53 PM, Mark Wieder via use-livecode wrote: Here's a scenario that will probably break: (save your work first) Heh. In trying to fix that, I broke it more, so I just uploaded version 2. Fun stuff, eh? -- Mark Wieder ahsoftw...@gmail.com

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

This sounds awesome! gc > On Mar 20, 2019, at 10:45 AM, Mark Wieder via use-livecode > wrote: > > Announcing (60 days until the San Jose conference): > > ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

And I wasn't there??!? Dam me! Dam me to heck!!! Bob S > On Mar 20, 2019, at 12:25 , Richard Gaskin via use-livecode > wrote: > > Mark demo'd this at our recent LiveCode User Group in Pasadena. It's cool. > You will want to download it. > > -- > Richard Gaskin > Fourth World Systems

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

You are the freaking bomb! Bob S > On Mar 20, 2019, at 10:45 , Mark Wieder via use-livecode > wrote: > > Announcing (60 days until the San Jose conference): > > Script Editor Refactor Plugin > Brings refactoring support to the LiveCode Script Editor. >Place t

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

On 3/20/19 12:04 PM, Kaveh Bazargan via use-livecode wrote: Now to try and break them. :-) Hmmmph... always some clown who wants to try to actually *use* stuff. Here's a scenario that will probably break: (save your work first) If you have a handler in a script and a handler with the same

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

On 3/20/19 1:52 PM, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode wrote: Wow. The whole thing sounds really cool but this "go back" bit is something I've wanted forever. You mind reader, you. Heh. I've needed to move that over from the glx2 editor for a long time as well. But I specifically added it

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

So useful and so clever made ... 5/5 stars! > Mark Wieder wrote: > Uploaded to LiveCodeShare: > http://livecodeshare.runrev.com/stack/934/revRefactor ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe,

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

On 3/20/19 12:45 PM, Mark Wieder via use-livecode wrote: Go Back (contextual menu only)     Not strictly part of a refactoring process, but since I was reworking the Edit menu anyway...     After a "Go to definition" call, this gets you back to where you were. Wow. The whole th

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

> Am 20.03.2019 um 20:25 schrieb Richard Gaskin via use-livecode > : > Mark demo'd this at our recent LiveCode User Group in Pasadena. It's cool. > You will want to download it. Not just to download, even to use it. ;) Matthias ___

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

Mark Wieder wrote: > Script Editor Refactor Plugin > Brings refactoring support to the LiveCode Script Editor. > Place the plugin into your user Plugins folder. > After launching the script editor there will be a new Refactoring > menuItem i

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

I'm beginning to like you Mark. ;-) Extremely useful set of tools. Now to try and break them. :-) On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 at 18:50, JJS via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > Just reading the possibilities looks awesome already. Have to check it out. > > Op 20-3-2019 om 19:45

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

Just reading the possibilities looks awesome already. Have to check it out. Op 20-3-2019 om 19:45 schreef Jacques Hausser via use-livecode: I had a dream…now it’s real ! Thanks ! Jacques Le 20 mars 2019 à 19:40, Mark Wieder via use-livecode a écrit : On 3/20/19 11:31 AM, Matthias Rebbe

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

I had a dream…now it’s real ! Thanks ! Jacques > Le 20 mars 2019 à 19:40, Mark Wieder via use-livecode > a écrit : > > On 3/20/19 11:31 AM, Matthias Rebbe via use-livecode wrote: >> Thanks for this great enhancement. >> The rename handler is something i would have needed yesterday... Took me

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

On 3/20/19 11:31 AM, Matthias Rebbe via use-livecode wrote: Thanks for this great enhancement. The rename handler is something i would have needed yesterday... Took me some time, but with your enhancement i would have been just some clicks and some typing. Ah... sorry about that... I was

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

> Script Editor Refactor Plugin >Brings refactoring support to the LiveCode Script Editor. >Place the plugin into your user Plugins folder. >After launching the script editor there will be a new Refactoring menuItem > in the Edit menu. >The Refactoring menuItem will

Re: ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

WOW On 3/20/2019 1:45 PM, Mark Wieder via use-livecode wrote: Announcing (60 days until the San Jose conference): Script Editor Refactor Plugin     Brings refactoring support to the LiveCode Script Editor.     Place the plugin into your user Plugins folder.     After launching the script

ANN: Script Editor Refactoring Support

Announcing (60 days until the San Jose conference): Script Editor Refactor Plugin Brings refactoring support to the LiveCode Script Editor. Place the plugin into your user Plugins folder. After launching the script editor there will be a new Refactoring menuItem in the Edit menu

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

> On 7 Jan 2019, at 17:00, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode > wrote: > > Perhaps the biggest flaw I've seen with v9 is the bug report tracking: the > Release Notes only include a subset of all issues addressed since work began > on it two years ago. My understanding from conversations with

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

Simon Knight wrote: > ...I do agree that the team does an extraordinary job of bug > reduction while adding features and keeping on top of all the > changes to the list of OS’s that livecode runs on. LC v9 is particularly strong in this regard. We have some in our community who've dreamed of a

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

> On 7 Jan 2019, at 08:16, Kay C Lan via use-livecode > wrote: > > And a spookily well timed questions; it's as if the late great Bill > Marriot hearkens from the grave. Bill was responsible for the focus > that took a very flakey Revolution, create the RQCC and develop what > is clearly a

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 4:26 AM Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote: > > Simon Knight wrote: > > One question why does this thread refer to RQCC ? > Richard Replied: > Old habits. The bug database used to be called the "Revolution Quality > Control Center", and the acronym is forever stuck in

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

Thanks for that confirmation Trevor great to hear that. On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 9:45 PM Trevor DeVore via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 4:56 PM Tom Glod via use-livecode < > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > > > > > Seems like signing the exec

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 4:56 PM Tom Glod via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > > Seems like signing the exec is a good idea and certainly can't hurtand > if I have to write some emails to get whitelisted I can do that too. FWIW I always sign my Windows standalones and I

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

Monday tomorrow, happy Sunday today On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 5:28 PM Simon Knight via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > Richard, > > Your are correct but Malte did ask ask about general refactoring (i > think) so I just mentioned my latest problem / findi

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

Richard, Your are correct but Malte did ask ask about general refactoring (i think) so I just mentioned my latest problem / finding. As to the PDF “feature” itsself I think its now up to Edinburgh to decide what to do; I doubt that they intended to have Adobe menus and button bars popping up

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

l lacking is word processing style tab aligns for normal text, and of course an option for column text wrap would be a huge improvement. Another item I enjoyed and used for refactoring is the "resolve" keyword for images. Not only good for optimization, but also for accuracy and

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

Malte Pfaff-Brill wrote: > If there were a list of things that do no longer work as they did non > previous engines it would have been beneficial for me to check off > points like „Yes, using that, need to fix / No, does not affect my > work" Half of that problem is solved in the Engine Changes

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

And of course, please also be vocal on the positives!!! Old engine Mac: Hi res images were a problem to render (for whatever reason, I had to use video player instead of image object to display those images). Limitations here have been lifted which for me is a very pleasant change! Cheers,

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

Hi Richard, >I didn't see Malte's mention of PDF in the post that began this thread, While that is true, but I am actually (as stated) keen to learn about everything that could be a gotcha when transitioning from the old engine to the latest, so this is welcome input. Also Marks mention of TAB

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

Simon Knight wrote: > This thread seems to have diverted away from Malte’s original post. Somewhat. His post from Dec 30 listed three issues: - IDE spams a lot of IDE only messages when creating many objects by script -> remedy: Lock messages Locking messages is a good habit for any

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

Curry Kenworthy wrote: > Richard: ... > > As hodge podge of what appear to be very different optimization > > opportunities under the hood, it may be difficult for the team to > > take action on it/them, and impossible to track. [... ... ...] ... > ..Moot point, because I didn't have time for

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

This thread seems to have diverted away from Malte’s original post. For Malte and others I have found that the revBrowser control is slower to render PDFs and may insert unwanted menus and button thanks to Adobe in version 9.02. See

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

Richard: > It's a bit confusing, since the Target Version shown there is 7, > but it was submitted just a few months ago, many years after v7 > was EOL'd. As you can see (in the message you replied to) I inquired back then, and was advised officially then. BTW, that's a bit like the concrete

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

Curry Kenworthy wrote: > Richard: > > I'd like to follow their progress [...] > > supporting the QA process benefits my work as well. > > Thanks, Richard! Yes, if you're not on the list for that bug, that > would superb to sign up. I thought it might be considered old or > familiar news here

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 10:13 AM Bob Sneidar via use-livecode wrote: > > I just finished a little utility that takes accounting data export from > Toshiba copiers ...The customer LOVES us. OT You might want to contact the Cuyahoga County Recorder's Office in Ohio as they clearly have

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

Richard: > I'd like to follow their progress [...] > supporting the QA process benefits my work as well. Thanks, Richard! Yes, if you're not on the list for that bug, that would superb to sign up. I thought it might be considered old or familiar news here since tests and observations had

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

Curry Kenworthy wrote: > http://curryk.com/NeverGonna.mp4 Thank you for the link to test results relating to specific issues. What bug reports can I find those test stacks attached to? I'd like to follow their progress, and perhaps re-run them to see where there may have been changes after

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

Richard: > Is there an actual list of concrete concerns here [...] > or did I just spend an hour reading that I'll never get back? > I feel rickrolled. A profound question, my friend. :D You may notice something special about the following link, adapted in honor of the situation:

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

+1 I'm just elated I can write apps again after such a long drought from Hypercard, and the disappointment I had with Supercard. I personally think LC is what Hypercard should ALWAYS have been, or would have become had Apple had kept it up, or had someone else taken it up. Now I do not develop

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

On 1/4/19 3:40 AM, Malte Pfaff-Brill via use-livecode wrote: Actually I did not expect this thread to turn into philosophical discussions. What I was searching for was input on gotchas you guys and girls may have experienced when moving from the monolith engine to the refactored one., so

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

unit tests or simple example stacks. One will need real world projects of a certain size to see the effect. To put things into perspective here, the app I am refactoring has to draw/redraw about 1500 controls, of which only a couple are changing positions / get a new label etc. Retina quite

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

On 2019-01-04 09:03, Kay C Lan via use-livecode wrote: So what I can't confirm is whether PR6671 has been implemented into a current version of LC9, but what I will say is this, if it hasn't then Malte can look forward to an eventual speed improvement in large Array operations as Mark Wa has

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

On 2019-01-04 07:40, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote: Read through this whole thread, optimistic that I'd find the list of things that differentiate v6 and v9 so we can hone in on actual solutions. I learned two things: - lock/unlock changed Except it hasn't - lock/unlock screen work

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 6:03 PM Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote: > Is there an actual list of concrete concerns here that the team may be > able to take action on ... I think the closest would be: >Malte wrote: >Not yet fixable for me: >Array operations on larger data sets still slower

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

Geoff Canyon wrote: > I wasn't sure what people were talking about with lock screen > performance issues, so I did a simple test ... > ...and found that in 6.7.3 that change increased the duration to about > 1.25 seconds -- a performance hit of about 30x just because a locked- > screen button is

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

I wasn't sure what people were talking about with lock screen performance issues, so I did a simple test: I set up a button to either lock the screen once, or twice, and then timed setting the loc of the button while the screen was locked. I didn't time locking the screen; just the movement while

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

Read through this whole thread, optimistic that I'd find the list of things that differentiate v6 and v9 so we can hone in on actual solutions. I learned two things: - lock/unlock changed - It's apparently easier to write a thousands of words philosophizing about how a small team of C++

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

Sorry Bob (not to single you out, on the contrary thanks for your reply and sharing your experience) but just be aware I never not enter a thread lightly, nor were my words hasty. This has been a situation years in the making, with plenty of evidence behind it, and I've been many years in

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

Not to put too fine a point on this, but ALL development environments suffer from this. Even if everything is done "right", future OS enhancements, new and improved plugins, LC feature enhancements and even developer enhancements can all lend themselves to the necessity for r

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

Bob: > This is largely due to unicode support in everything, > as I understand it. Nope, I think that was more of a prior assumption going in, and held onto despite test results to the contrary, than a conclusion derived from testing. :) Some tests were designed to rule out the effects of

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

This is largely due to unicode support in everything, as I understand it. This performance hit is, I think, completely understandable. But there definitely is/was something else going on when developing under Windows. As other threads have amply demonstrated, V9 introduced a massive performance

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

On 2019-01-03 12:13, Malte Pfaff-Brill via use-livecode wrote: It might be that I stand corrected for the behaviour of lock / unlock screen. But then I also stand puzzled on the effect it has between engines. Same code which redrew the screen within 2.5 seconds on the 5.x series took 11 secs in

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

erformance over time. And that's passive gain; any work on code improvements would yield a multiple of performance. Likewise, in 2 years LC has required one heck of a lot of refactoring. That may be fine and dandy for people who write loose and sloppy code the first time and love rewriting

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

I'm curious if issuing a new screen lock inadvertently and for an instant unlocks the screen and a redraw happens? Not the desired effect obviously but that would explain things somewhat. Bob S > On Jan 3, 2019, at 03:13 , Malte Pfaff-Brill via use-livecode > wrote: > > It might be that I

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

It might be that I stand corrected for the behaviour of lock / unlock screen. But then I also stand puzzled on the effect it has between engines. Same code which redrew the screen within 2.5 seconds on the 5.x series took 11 secs in 8/9. After debugging libraries. Being used to make sure that

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 9:17 AM Mark Wieder via use-livecode wrote: > > Yes, it is definitely a change in behavior. I want to strongly disagree with your conclusion here ;-) > > This isn't the only place where the dictionary is wrong. My 9.0.2 Dictionary quite clearly states for the property

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

I first saw this loop in a script by Brett Sher, who called it "unlockReally", so you're close. :) (I accidentally put this response in the wrong thread at first where it doesn't make any sense, sorry about that.) -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software |

Re: Refactoring is your friend / moving from 6.x to 9.x

I first saw this loop in a script by Brett Sher, who called it "unlockReally", so you're close. :) -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com On January 2, 2019 5:26:09 AM Andre Garzia via use-livecode wrote: That loop is

  1   2   >