Re: OT: Priorities (was: Re: Stack with the same name loop)

Curry Kenworthy wrote: > (I never have, and never will, > quote the entire post. Misguided trend.) I edit down to the relevant portions, so people have the opportunity to know what I'm replying to. -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Systems ___

Re: Stack with the same name loop

Thank you for confirming that the engine does not throw an error when encountering stacks of the same name. At the heart of the issue seems to be a difference in how short stack names are resolved vs things like topstack. Though related to the duplicate stack name issue, the core underlying

Re: Hot Folders solution for Windows with LC

The only way I know to to that in LiveCode is by polling the folder at some interval. You get the detailed files (for the last modification date) filter to PDFs output them to pdf/1-1b's Save this initial detail list of PDF files (in a variable or property or field) Then send a message to

Re: Hot Folders solution for Windows with LC

Thanks Paul, that's the way i was planning to do it. But i will move the original file into a subfolder, so that the hot folder only contains new unprocessed files. I was more looking to rule out any known problems that might occur when doing this. Matthias > Am 07.10.2021 um 22:32 schrieb

Re: OT: Priorities (was: Re: Stack with the same name loop)

My two pesos, following these comments Sean: > they leave something as *basic as this > unrepaired for EIGHTTEENYEARS !?! Jacqueline: > they have to make considered choices in what to address > at any given time given the resources available to them. Bernard: > At least the new

Re: Stack with the same name loop

On 10/7/21 10:38 AM, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode wrote: For me, the confusion would be resolved if the Save button was renamed to "Save and Purge". I was never quite sure what that button saved, though in retrospect it's pretty obvious. How about a fourth option to rename the stack in

Re: OT: Priorities (was: Re: Stack with the same name loop)

Richard: > And in this here-and-now, I don't have an opinion > on the conversation between Jacque and Sean, > which is why I didn't reply to them. Jacque and Sean made good points. As did Bob and Bernard. Which is why I quoted them too. All of them made great points on Priorities, the thread

Re: Hot Folders solution for Windows with LC

I've done a lot with lists of files and moving and renaming files and folders. I've run into no 'gotchas' other my my fat fingers making typos in my code ;-) On 10/7/2021 5:00 PM, matthias rebbe via use-livecode wrote: Thanks Paul, that's the way i was planning to do it. But i will move

Re: OT: Priorities (was: Re: Stack with the same name loop)

Curry: > Richard: >> Heather politely called cheese on this topic some time ago. >> May we please respect the wishes of the list owner? > > I propose reducing the attempts to silence one another? > > That cheese remark doesn't sound like a very accurate portrayal; > that license change topic

Hot Folders solution for Windows with LC

Hi, before i reinvent the wheel... Has anyone on the list already created a solution for monitoring a folder on Windows (server) for new files and to do some action on that new files? I need to create a tool that monitors a folder on Windows Server 2019 and if a new pdf file is in the

Re: Stack with the same name loop

On 10/7/21 6:40 AM, Mark Waddingham via use-livecode wrote: The correct behavior of that dialog is precisely what you would expect from the button names:   1) Cancel - the loading of the new stack does not happen.   2) Purge - the existing stack of the same name is removed from memory

Re: Stack with the same name loop

On 7 Oct 2021, at 17:28, Mark Waddingham via use-livecode wrote: > > So the first thing to ask is, is the recipe as simple as: > > 1) Select stack you want to 'Save As' > 2) File > Save As > 3) Give a different name and Save > 4) Duplicate name Save/Purge/Cancel dialog appears? > > Or is

Re: Stack with the same name loop

Jaque wrote > On 8 Oct 2021, at 7:54 am, use-livecode-requ...@lists.runrev.com wrote: > > For me, the confusion would be resolved if the Save button was renamed to > "Save and Purge". I was never quite sure what that button saved, though in > retrospect it's pretty obvious. And ... if the

Re: Stack with the same name loop

On 10/7/21 12:54 PM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote: Though related to the duplicate stack name issue, the core underlying cause is a separate item logged here: https://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=18793 Note that you can use the property inspector to change the name of a

Re: Stack with the same name loop

On 10/7/21 1:08 PM, Mark Wieder via use-livecode wrote: How about a fourth option to rename the stack in memory and continue? ...replying to myself... I fixed reloadStack to allow a rename and be a little less scary. I just edited the livecodescript file on disk and it so far seems to work in

Re: Stack with the same name loop

On 2021-10-07 20:12, Pi Digital via use-livecode wrote: Quite right. I make sure it’s the main stack selected and that all other stacks, inspectors and editors are closed just in case. Then, as you have it laid out in steps 2 to 4 and 4 and 4 ad infinitum. :) That’s all there is to it. There

LC apps crashing on devices running iOS 15.x

Fernando and I have submitted a bug report (https://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=23364 ) after confirming that previously stable LC iOS apps are intermittently crashing at launch on devices (iPhone & iPad) running iOS 15.x. We have submitted crash logs to LC. The issue has been

Re: OT: Priorities (was: Re: Stack with the same name loop)

> On 7 Oct 2021, at 05:49, J. Landman Gay wrote: > > In the larger picture, what would you address first: Firstly the fundamentals Closely followed by UX These are the foundation upon which ALL software AND hardware are based. Without them everything else is a waste. Sure, a wheel can have

Re: Stack with the same name loop

RE: the “purge/save/cancel” thing. I see this exactly twice whenever I build a standalone for a particular project. Even in a new session, if the first thing I do is build a standalone from the splash stack, I will twice get a dialog during the process asking me the three questions. I always

Re: Stack with the same name loop

Hi Mark (both :) ) Thanks for your explanation. Very thorough. What I don’t understand is why the engine needs to delete the old reference (weak handle) when invoking a ‘save as’. Is it not just a matter of resaving you a new location and making the pointer to the storage device for that

Re: Stack with the same name loop

On 2021-10-07 15:26, Pi Digital via use-livecode wrote: Hi Mark (both :) ) Thanks for your explanation. Very thorough. What I don’t understand is why the engine needs to delete the old reference (weak handle) when invoking a ‘save as’. Is it not just a matter of resaving you a new location and

Re: Stack with the same name loop

I am using a little plugin for this. It allows me to save the stack file under an other name. For those who are interested... https://dl.qck.nu/?dl=copyStack.livecode When it opens it displays the name of the current top stack. If you want to copy

Re: Stack with the same name loop

On 2021-10-06 22:30, Mark Wieder via use-livecode wrote: That's what I do as well. Kill, then go do something else for a bit. Reading the code that invokes this dialog (the reloadstack handler in revbackscriptlibrary.livecodescript) isn't much help. It's only the IDE that can't handle this, not

Re: OT: Priorities (was: Re: Stack with the same name loop)

At least the new licensing model should allow LC to prioritise based on what customers use. IMO the open source initiative was the single biggest mistake LC Ltd made. With that drain on resources over hopefully they can get to work on fixing some of the outstanding deficiencies.

Re: Stack with the same name loop

I guess it comes down to what different people are doing with LC. I get the erroneous "this script has been altered externally" message about 3 times a year. I never get the "A stack with the same name as the one you are trying to load" unless I really am opening two stacks with the same name.

Re: Stack with the same name loop

> On 7 Oct 2021, at 15:38, Mark Waddingham via use-livecode > wrote: > > So the looping problem here lies somewhere in the process removing the > existing stack from memory / saving it. Like what, for example? Thanks. ___ use-livecode mailing

Re: Stack with the same name loop

Clone stack avoids the check. It is not that hard to get multiple stacks with the same short name but different long names in memory (in a standalone). The engine makes sane choices when referencing the top stack in that case. Any individual stack can be referenced via the long name. Sent

Re: Stack with the same name loop

On 2021-10-07 15:57, Brian Milby via use-livecode wrote: Clone stack avoids the check. It is not that hard to get multiple stacks with the same short name but different long names in memory (in a standalone). The engine makes sane choices when referencing the top stack in that case. Any

Re: Stack with the same name loop

> On 7 Oct 2021, at 15:49, Mark Waddingham via use-livecode > wrote: > > Indeed, is this a multi-stack system which you are working on? Is there a way > your code (which is being triggered somehow after save) is referencing the > stack you just saved as, by its original filename? It is a

Re: OT: Priorities (was: Re: Stack with the same name loop)

+1. Gave me the heebie jeebies when they announced the Open Source model. I survived the age of freeware. There were a LOT of people back then who opined that ALL software ought to be free! It was staggering. There were great repositories of commerial titles, and I mean the big stuff, that had

Re: Stack with the same name loop

I would be more of a fan of lowering the engine check to just a warning vice a hard error/prohibition. Like you said, if you don’t use the long name then most of the time you are going to reference the earliest opened version of the stack (based on the linked list of open stacks). But if you

Re: Stack with the same name loop

On 2021-10-07 15:38, Mark Waddingham via use-livecode wrote: On 2021-10-07 15:26, Pi Digital via use-livecode wrote: Hi Mark (both :) ) Thanks for your explanation. Very thorough. What I don’t understand is why the engine needs to delete the old reference (weak handle) when invoking a ‘save

Re: Stack with the same name loop

Mark, Yes, building standalones is a huge problem. I think that when a single platform standalone is created, the state Livecode ends up in ought to be the state Livecode started in before you built the standalone. This does not seem to be the case. Stacks opened during the build process seem

Re: OT: Priorities (was: Re: Stack with the same name loop)

Heather politely called cheese on this topic some time ago. May we please respect the wishes of the list owner? -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Systems Bob Sneidar wrote: +1. Gave me the heebie jeebies when they announced the Open Source model. I survived the age of freeware. There

Re: Stack with the same name loop

On 2021-10-07 17:10, Pi Digital via use-livecode wrote: The ‘save/purge/cancel’ is only intuitive to you it seems because you understand the background. It doesn’t seem to make sense to us (and certainly not a newcomer) because we have only our experience from other software to go on and how we

Re: Stack with the same name loop

On 2021-10-07 17:25, Brian Milby via use-livecode wrote: I would be more of a fan of lowering the engine check to just a warning vice a hard error/prohibition. Like you said, if you don’t use the long name then most of the time you are going to reference the earliest opened version of the stack

Re: Stack with the same name loop

For me, the confusion would be resolved if the Save button was renamed to "Save and Purge". I was never quite sure what that button saved, though in retrospect it's pretty obvious. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com On

Re: Stack with the same name loop

Standalone building needs to be a separate process. In the olden days, standalones were build by merging the stack file on disk with the engine, with no changes or additions to objects inside the stack. When new features were introduced which requiring adding library button inside a

RE: IAP in App Store

"complete" status only means that the process is complete. A purchase is only complete if "complete" is preceded by a "paymentReceived" or in the case of a user with a new device "restored". At least that's the way I understand it. This logic has worked for me. Ralph DiMola IT Director Evergreen

Re: Stack with the same name loop

Brian Milby wrote: > Clone stack avoids the check. It is not that hard to get > multiple stacks with the same short name but different > long names in memory (in a standalone). Clone alters the name of the new clone stack. The engine prepends it with "Copy of ". AFAIK it's done that since

Re: Stack with the same name loop

I was not aware of the rename possibility, so it would be possible to produce a plug-in that would use your code snip to allow a duplicate named stack to open. The only time I’ve really run into this is with “Untitled 1” stacks. I’ve done something quick and saved it without changing the stack

Re: Stack with the same name loop

Yes, but it does not add anything else. If you do it two times you end up with 2 identically named stacks. You can save them to disk with different long names and end up with multiple stacks with the same short name but different long name. My demo is on bug 18793. It works in the IDE.