Re: Intel CPU for Android Devices
Thanks Ralph...I will test. --Todd On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 4:19 PM, Ralph DiMola wrote: > I have an old Samsung Galaxy Tab 3 10.1 the has an Intel Atom processor and > it runs LC 8.1.9/9.0(rc)1 apps. The apps are a bit slow but do run(I > wonder > if there's emulating going on?). I have not installed from the store. I > side-load using adb. Is the app visible on the PlayStore to the devices? If > so does it download/install? If it installs does it even start running? > > Ralph DiMola > IT Director > Evergreen Information Services > rdim...@evergreeninfo.net > > -Original Message- > From: use-livecode [mailto:use-livecode-boun...@lists.runrev.com] On > Behalf > Of Todd Fabacher via use-livecode > Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2018 10:35 AM > To: Use-livecode Use-livecode > Cc: Todd Fabacher > Subject: Intel CPU for Android Devices > > I am running into a problem where the Android device uses Intel CPU and NOT > Arm. It does not rum from the store on the device. Has anyone installed and > run a LiveCode Android App on an Intel device. > > I have an 11am meeting on Monday, so any answer on the holiday weekend > would > be much appreciated. > > Thanks, > > Todd > ___ > use-livecode mailing list > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your > subscription > preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode > > ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: do. command. safety. ?
Jacque wrote: > could you provide an example where the embedded command would actually > execute? A variant of Mark's example which executes when passed to fooEvil but not when pass to fooGood: on mouseUp put "into x ""e&";answer GOTCHA &cr& word 1 of the params #" \ into tUserInput fooGood tUserInput fooEvil tUserInput end mouseUp on fooGood pUserInput do "put pUserInput into x" end fooGood on fooEvil pUserInput do "put " "e& pUserInput "e&" into x" end fooEvil -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Systems Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Multiple Windows
Richmond Mathewson wrote: > I know the idea of being able to display different cards from one > stack in different windows is something that has exercised many > people for a long time. > > I had a fantasy that ran like this: > > [pseudoCode] > > show card 6 of stack "Stack1" in stack "subStack1" > > How daft is that? No more daft than Gain Momentum, a powerful xTalk I worked with back in the day that had an object type called Viewers that did exactly what you describe. https://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2786 -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Systems Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: do. command. safety. ?
The question is exactly what did you type into the field ? It's unclear whether the quotes in your email are part of the email, or part of the field content. Here's a case that definitely shows the difference: button "Button" on mouseup localtVar, tX do"put "&& quote& thetextoffld1& quote&& "into tx" put"now tx="&& tX &CRaftermsg end mouseup and button "safe" on mouseup localtVar, tX putfld1intotVar do"put tVar into tX" put"now tx="&& tX &CRaftermsg end mouseup and into the field I typed 1+2+3" into tt;set the backcolor of btn 1 to blue;put " Clicking button 'safe' gives now tx= 1+2+3" into tt;set the backcolor of btn 1 to blue;put " after the msg box; and repeated clicks there produce extra lines all the same. Clicking button 'button' gives now tx= in the msgbox, and the button color changes. So the embedded command within the field is being executed. -- Alex. On 31/03/2018 20:03, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode wrote: At the risk of appearing to be obtuse...I tried both versions of the "do" and got the same results. In each case, the variable was populated but no code was executed. In a test stack with one field and one button, I entered ";set the backcolor of btn 1 to blue;put ". In the button script I tried both versions of your example (substituting "fld 1" for "user input".) I also tried it without the semicolons and extra "put " at the end. In each case the variable x contained "set the backcolor of btn 1 to blue" and the button did not change color. I am quite sure you are right, but could you provide an example where the embedded command would actually execute? On 3/30/18 7:06 PM, Mark Waddingham via use-livecode wrote: The user input was indirected through a variable in the safe version - not made part of the do string... That's the critical difference. The unsafe version allows user input to change the do'd code, the safe version only changes the content of a variable the do string uses. Warmest Regards, Mark. Sent from my iPhone On 30 Mar 2018, at 19:24, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode wrote: Well yes, but as Bob mentioned, wouldn't a variable do the same thing? put ";delete hard drive;put " into x do x vs: do "put " && quote & ";delete hard drive;put " & quote && "into x" This actually came up way back in MetaCard where it was pointed out that the engine was about as secure as it gets as long as you validate all user input when using "do" or (I think) "value". In the first example above, input needs to be examined before the "do" command is issued. So I think there's a line or two missing in there somewhere. ;) On 3/30/18 12:15 PM, Mark Waddingham via use-livecode wrote: Think about the string that can be constructed in the quoted version - user input could be "; ...;put " where ... is any code you would like... Sent from my iPhone On 30 Mar 2018, at 18:09, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode wrote: These look the same to me. Both versions place content into a variable. Is the difference because of how the engine evaluates the input somehow? -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com On March 30, 2018 11:04:54 AM Mark Waddingham via use-livecode wrote: Using do safely is the same as making database queries safe, or URL requests. You 'just' need to make sure that any input from outside is sanitized to ensure that it doesn't change the meaning of the expression you are 'doing'. For example, don't interpolate strings directly in the script using quotes, use a local var instead: put user input into tVar1 do "put tVar1 into x" -- safe Rather than do "put " && quote & user input & quote && "into x" -- not safe Warmest Regards, Mark. Sent from my iPhone On 30 Mar 2018, at 16:43, Tom Glod via use-livecode wrote: Dear Geniuses Sometimes late at night just before falling asleep I think about the dangers of the do command. Is it possible to inject code into this mechanism through malware? I do not have enough understanding of operating systems and their processes ...and the livecode engineto be able to know if its a reasonable question or not. Thanks for any input on this. ___ -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailin
RE: Browser Widget Document Download
Hey BR, The link is going to a content management system(Adobe I think) http://www.gasb.org/cs/ContentServer?c=Document_C&cid=1176169676825&d=&pagen ame=GASB%2FDocument_C%2FDocumentPage The file name is buried in the html but not the path. It's in an iFrame but it gets rendered by some unknown SW on iOS. On Android it just start silently start downloading while displaying a white page. What I would like to do is control where the PDF is being downloaded to and force a download on iOS. I'm guessing(with great disappointment) that this would require a change to the browser widget. Thanks... Ralph DiMola IT Director Evergreen Information Services rdim...@evergreeninfo.net -Original Message- From: use-livecode [mailto:use-livecode-boun...@lists.runrev.com] On Behalf Of Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami via use-livecode Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2018 1:00 PM To: Ralph DiMola via use-livecode Cc: Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami Subject: Re: Browser Widget Document Download When I set the widget to the url the PDF displays. When I put the url into a var "put url (tURL) into MyVar" I see some html/javascript in MyVar but no PDF. What I would like to do is download the PDF on both mobile platforms. Is this even possible with LC? BR: can you send the URL? Typically, (probably you know this already, but FWIW) this shows a PDF in a iFrame, some javascript "widget" . If you how source in the browser, (with PDF open) can you can find a "direct" url for the PDF? ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
RE: Intel CPU for Android Devices
I have an old Samsung Galaxy Tab 3 10.1 the has an Intel Atom processor and it runs LC 8.1.9/9.0(rc)1 apps. The apps are a bit slow but do run(I wonder if there's emulating going on?). I have not installed from the store. I side-load using adb. Is the app visible on the PlayStore to the devices? If so does it download/install? If it installs does it even start running? Ralph DiMola IT Director Evergreen Information Services rdim...@evergreeninfo.net -Original Message- From: use-livecode [mailto:use-livecode-boun...@lists.runrev.com] On Behalf Of Todd Fabacher via use-livecode Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2018 10:35 AM To: Use-livecode Use-livecode Cc: Todd Fabacher Subject: Intel CPU for Android Devices I am running into a problem where the Android device uses Intel CPU and NOT Arm. It does not rum from the store on the device. Has anyone installed and run a LiveCode Android App on an Intel device. I have an 11am meeting on Monday, so any answer on the holiday weekend would be much appreciated. Thanks, Todd ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: do. command. safety. ?
On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 9:02 AM, Mark Waddingham via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > > do "put " && quote & user input & quote && "into x" -- not safe > Thus, do "initiate global thermonuclear war" :) Was shazam the statistical package that actually implemented that (only partially, we hoped!) -- Dr. Richard E. Hawkins, Esq. (702) 508-8462 ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: do. command. safety. ?
BTW, I know this works and is dangerous: do It's the insertions that don't seem to be affected. On 3/31/18 2:03 PM, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode wrote: At the risk of appearing to be obtuse...I tried both versions of the "do" and got the same results. In each case, the variable was populated but no code was executed. In a test stack with one field and one button, I entered ";set the backcolor of btn 1 to blue;put ". In the button script I tried both versions of your example (substituting "fld 1" for "user input".) I also tried it without the semicolons and extra "put " at the end. In each case the variable x contained "set the backcolor of btn 1 to blue" and the button did not change color. I am quite sure you are right, but could you provide an example where the embedded command would actually execute? On 3/30/18 7:06 PM, Mark Waddingham via use-livecode wrote: The user input was indirected through a variable in the safe version - not made part of the do string... That's the critical difference. The unsafe version allows user input to change the do'd code, the safe version only changes the content of a variable the do string uses. Warmest Regards, Mark. Sent from my iPhone On 30 Mar 2018, at 19:24, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode wrote: Well yes, but as Bob mentioned, wouldn't a variable do the same thing? put ";delete hard drive;put " into x do x vs: do "put " && quote & ";delete hard drive;put " & quote && "into x" This actually came up way back in MetaCard where it was pointed out that the engine was about as secure as it gets as long as you validate all user input when using "do" or (I think) "value". In the first example above, input needs to be examined before the "do" command is issued. So I think there's a line or two missing in there somewhere. ;) On 3/30/18 12:15 PM, Mark Waddingham via use-livecode wrote: Think about the string that can be constructed in the quoted version - user input could be "; ...;put " where ... is any code you would like... Sent from my iPhone On 30 Mar 2018, at 18:09, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode wrote: These look the same to me. Both versions place content into a variable. Is the difference because of how the engine evaluates the input somehow? -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com On March 30, 2018 11:04:54 AM Mark Waddingham via use-livecode wrote: Using do safely is the same as making database queries safe, or URL requests. You 'just' need to make sure that any input from outside is sanitized to ensure that it doesn't change the meaning of the expression you are 'doing'. For example, don't interpolate strings directly in the script using quotes, use a local var instead: put user input into tVar1 do "put tVar1 into x" -- safe Rather than do "put " && quote & user input & quote && "into x" -- not safe Warmest Regards, Mark. Sent from my iPhone On 30 Mar 2018, at 16:43, Tom Glod via use-livecode wrote: Dear Geniuses Sometimes late at night just before falling asleep I think about the dangers of the do command. Is it possible to inject code into this mechanism through malware? I do not have enough understanding of operating systems and their processes ...and the livecode engineto be able to know if its a reasonable question or not. Thanks for any input on this. ___ -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: do. command. safety. ?
At the risk of appearing to be obtuse...I tried both versions of the "do" and got the same results. In each case, the variable was populated but no code was executed. In a test stack with one field and one button, I entered ";set the backcolor of btn 1 to blue;put ". In the button script I tried both versions of your example (substituting "fld 1" for "user input".) I also tried it without the semicolons and extra "put " at the end. In each case the variable x contained "set the backcolor of btn 1 to blue" and the button did not change color. I am quite sure you are right, but could you provide an example where the embedded command would actually execute? On 3/30/18 7:06 PM, Mark Waddingham via use-livecode wrote: The user input was indirected through a variable in the safe version - not made part of the do string... That's the critical difference. The unsafe version allows user input to change the do'd code, the safe version only changes the content of a variable the do string uses. Warmest Regards, Mark. Sent from my iPhone On 30 Mar 2018, at 19:24, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode wrote: Well yes, but as Bob mentioned, wouldn't a variable do the same thing? put ";delete hard drive;put " into x do x vs: do "put " && quote & ";delete hard drive;put " & quote && "into x" This actually came up way back in MetaCard where it was pointed out that the engine was about as secure as it gets as long as you validate all user input when using "do" or (I think) "value". In the first example above, input needs to be examined before the "do" command is issued. So I think there's a line or two missing in there somewhere. ;) On 3/30/18 12:15 PM, Mark Waddingham via use-livecode wrote: Think about the string that can be constructed in the quoted version - user input could be "; ...;put " where ... is any code you would like... Sent from my iPhone On 30 Mar 2018, at 18:09, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode wrote: These look the same to me. Both versions place content into a variable. Is the difference because of how the engine evaluates the input somehow? -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com On March 30, 2018 11:04:54 AM Mark Waddingham via use-livecode wrote: Using do safely is the same as making database queries safe, or URL requests. You 'just' need to make sure that any input from outside is sanitized to ensure that it doesn't change the meaning of the expression you are 'doing'. For example, don't interpolate strings directly in the script using quotes, use a local var instead: put user input into tVar1 do "put tVar1 into x" -- safe Rather than do "put " && quote & user input & quote && "into x" -- not safe Warmest Regards, Mark. Sent from my iPhone On 30 Mar 2018, at 16:43, Tom Glod via use-livecode wrote: Dear Geniuses Sometimes late at night just before falling asleep I think about the dangers of the do command. Is it possible to inject code into this mechanism through malware? I do not have enough understanding of operating systems and their processes ...and the livecode engineto be able to know if its a reasonable question or not. Thanks for any input on this. ___ -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Browser Widget Document Download
When I set the widget to the url the PDF displays. When I put the url into a var "put url (tURL) into MyVar" I see some html/javascript in MyVar but no PDF. What I would like to do is download the PDF on both mobile platforms. Is this even possible with LC? BR: can you send the URL? Typically, (probably you know this already, but FWIW) this shows a PDF in a iFrame, some javascript "widget" . If you how source in the browser, (with PDF open) can you can find a "direct" url for the PDF? ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Intel CPU for Android Devices
I don't have a solution, but the Play Store lets you set incompatible versions or devices. Those won't show up in searches, or if the user gets there some other way there's a banner saying the app is incompatible with the device. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com On March 31, 2018 9:36:37 AM Todd Fabacher via use-livecode wrote: I am running into a problem where the Android device uses Intel CPU and NOT Arm. It does not rum from the store on the device. Has anyone installed and run a LiveCode Android App on an Intel device. I have an 11am meeting on Monday, so any answer on the holiday weekend would be much appreciated. Thanks, Todd ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Multiple Windows
Richmond. I saw your construction of two stacks displayed in a "frame", so it appeared that two cards were simultaneously present in a single "stack". I see what you are after; the goal being be able to navigate in each card separately. Why only two? Anyway, I have never needed such a feature, but certainly see that others might. I often open substacks (or other stacks) on screen, generally for a particular purpose ancillary to the working stack, and close them when done. They are in that case just a high-powered dialog box, used basically in the same way. I remember when HC allowed up to 16 open stacks, as opposed to just one. A major enhancement. A multi-visible-card stack would be useful for multimedia displays, and likely for other purposes. It sounds like a major effort, though, addressing the foundations of the program itself. Can't wait to see what comes back... Craig -- Sent from: http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Revolution-User-f278306.html ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Intel CPU for Android Devices
I am running into a problem where the Android device uses Intel CPU and NOT Arm. It does not rum from the store on the device. Has anyone installed and run a LiveCode Android App on an Intel device. I have an 11am meeting on Monday, so any answer on the holiday weekend would be much appreciated. Thanks, Todd ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: variable xref
Whenever you deprecate code you may be destroying someone’s life’s coding work. There should always be at least a rock solid migration utility offered that will make any such deprecations completely smooth, and painless for anyone who has to make the changes. Just my 2 cents for the day. ;-) Rick > On Mar 30, 2018, at 1:53 PM, Mikey via use-livecode > wrote: > > Deprecating “features” is often the right thing to do because it cleans up > kluges that are no long necessary, and clarity and simplicity and order are > restored. Yes, that means that some code will be affected and have to be > reworked. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Multiple Windows
I know the idea of being able to display different cards from one stack in different windows is something that has exercised many people for a long time. I had a fantasy that ran like this: [pseudoCode] show card 6 of stack "Stack1" in stack "subStack1" How daft is that? Richmond. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode