Hi Robert.
I already know there is a problem closing a stack which a running handler
belonging to that stack (I have destroyStack on because I want to remove the
module from memory when I am not using it). This has actually been discussed a
while back. Someone else was having the same issue. It
On 5/21/2014, 1:40 PM, Bob Sneidar wrote:
Hey putting an on idle handler in the open substack then passing idle worked!
Now that you have that worked out...I wouldn't use an idle handler to
close a stack though. It's going to try to close that stack dozens of
times per second. Maybe you've ch
On 21.05.2014 at 18:31 Uhr + Bob Sneidar apparently wrote:
Okay well that is making a little more sense. So if I put an on idle
handler in all my stacks and then pass the message, it should filter
down to my mainstack. I suppose I could insert the
stack-closing-code in all my substacks, but
Bob Sneidar wrote:
> Okay well that is making a little more sense. So if I put an on idle
> handler in all my stacks and then pass the message, it should filter
> down to my mainstack. I suppose I could insert the stack-closing-code
> in all my substacks, but that makes me feel dirty somehow. ;-)
Hey putting an on idle handler in the open substack then passing idle worked!
Nice catch for sure Alejandro. So the lesson here is, if a handler belonging to
a script anywhere in a running stack, issuing close this stack will not do so,
understandably. (I know others have shown me how it works O
Okay well that is making a little more sense. So if I put an on idle handler in
all my stacks and then pass the message, it should filter down to my mainstack.
I suppose I could insert the stack-closing-code in all my substacks, but that
makes me feel dirty somehow. ;-)
Bob S
On May 21, 2014,
Alejandro Tejada wrote:
Idle command only runs on the stack when it has
the mouse pointer focus... or at least this is how
I understand this behavior of Idle.
Good catch, Alejandro.
There are a handful of messages which have this sort of "existential"
behavior (mousewithin is another) - from
Hi Bob,
Bob Sneidar-2 wrote
> Okay it looks like the idle command is not getting passed
> to the back script for some reason.
> [snip]
Idle command only runs on the stack when it has
the mouse pointer focus... or at least this is how
I understand this behavior of Idle.
Test this stack
https://w
Bob Sneidar wrote:
> Not getting passed to the mainstack either. Not a back script problem.
...
> On May 21, 2014, at 08:48 , Bob Sneidar wrote:
>
> Okay it looks like the idle command is not getting passed to the back
> script for some reason. I have this in a back script
This sounds like a job
Not getting passed to the mainstack either. Not a back script problem.
Bob
On May 21, 2014, at 08:48 , Bob Sneidar
mailto:bobsnei...@iotecdigital.com>> wrote:
Okay it looks like the idle command is not getting passed to the back script
for some reason. I have this in a back script:
_
Okay it looks like the idle command is not getting passed to the back script
for some reason. I have this in a back script:
on idle
global theStack
breakpoint
try
close stack theStack
put empty into theStack
catch theError
end try
end idle
When script execution termi
In my case the stubborn stack is a regular mainstack that's not in use. A
couple others are in use but for some reason they don't cause as much trouble.
On May 21, 2014 10:10:09 AM CDT, Devin Asay wrote:
>
>Jacque and Bob,
>
>I've noticed that sometimes if I'm using library stacks the stack c
Thanks Devin, but none of my substacks are library stacks. If I use library
stacks they are always standalone stacks.
Bob
On May 21, 2014, at 08:10 , Devin Asay
mailto:devin_a...@byu.edu>> wrote:
On May 20, 2014, at 11:15 PM, "J. Landman Gay"
mailto:jac...@hyperactivesw.com>>
wrote:
On 5/2
I’m running 6.6.1. I do not have 2 copies open however. The stack is a substack
of my main stack. I use stacks as software modules, so to speak, in this
application. I hide my mainstack window when I open a substack module. When I
close the substack window, my on closeStack handler in the main s
On May 20, 2014, at 11:15 PM, "J. Landman Gay"
wrote:
> On 5/20/2014, 9:41 PM, Bob Sneidar wrote:
>> NVM my NVM. I passed all the closeStack messages as well as the
>> closeStackRequest messages. Stack still will not close.
>
> If you are trying to not just close the stack but also remove it f
On 5/20/2014, 9:41 PM, Bob Sneidar wrote:
NVM my NVM. I passed all the closeStack messages as well as the
closeStackRequest messages. Stack still will not close.
If you are trying to not just close the stack but also remove it from
memory, I hit a similar problem with a series of converted HC
NVM my NVM. I passed all the closeStack messages as well as the
closeStackRequest messages. Stack still will not close.
Bob S
On May 20, 2014, at 19:11 , Bob Sneidar wrote:
> NVM I think I am trapping closeStack somewhere.
>
> Bob
>
>
> On May 20, 2014, at 18:40 , Bob Sneidar wrote:
>
>
NVM I think I am trapping closeStack somewhere.
Bob
On May 20, 2014, at 18:40 , Bob Sneidar wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> I am at a complete loss. I am trying to make a stack close itself via script.
> I get you cannot do this while a script is running, so I tried send in time.
> No dice. Stack no c
18 matches
Mail list logo
