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

OK, well sorry I guess. I me be slightly obsessed with the history lately, and since this was already an off-topic thread, I felt a need to inject some accurate (as accurate as I can gather anyway) history. On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 6:05 PM Bob Sneidar via use-livecode <

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

I don't disagree but the point I was addressing was why Hypercard was abandoned, and how this related to the recent changes in RunRev pricing policy. Bob S > On Oct 25, 2021, at 12:52 , Paul McClernan via use-livecode > wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 11:18 AM Bob Sneidar via

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

On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 11:18 AM Bob Sneidar via use-livecode wrote: > > Or the lesson may be that when a product is not commercially produced, there > is no incentive to keep it updated and improve it. The lesson may be that a > free mainstream product is an eventually doomed product. > > Bob

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

+1 > On Oct 24, 2021, at 05:19 , Bernard Devlin via use-livecode > wrote: > > "Men make history, just not on grounds of their own choosing". > > Regards, Bernard ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to

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

Or the lesson may be that when a product is not commercially produced, there is no incentive to keep it updated and improve it. The lesson may be that a free mainstream product is an eventually doomed product. Bob S > On Oct 23, 2021, at 09:47 , Richmond via use-livecode > wrote: > > What

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

No, coulda, woulda and shoulda are, probably a waste of time, but learning from history might not be a waste of time. Richmond. On 24.10.21 15:19, Bernard Devlin via use-livecode wrote: I don't see much benefit in coulda, woulda, shoulda. Tcl was so prominent it was actually listed in the

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

I don't see much benefit in coulda, woulda, shoulda. Tcl was so prominent it was actually listed in the HTML 4 reference spec as one of three possible languages which could be used to write dynamic HTML (VBScript, Tcl, Javascript). https://www.w3.org/TR/html401/interact/scripts.html Tcl being

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

On Sat, Oct 23, 2021 at 12:49 PM Richmond via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > What seems to come out of your interesting historical observations is > that HyperCard went "wrong" when people had to start paying for it. > I think it was a series of things that went wrong

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

What seems to come out of your interesting historical observations is that HyperCard went "wrong" when people had to start paying for it. There is obviously a lesson for today here. Interestingly enough WINE (open source) and CodeWeavers (prop.) seem to manage to co-exist and help each other

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

On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 11:56 AM Bob Sneidar via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > I say the people at Livecode LTD. deserve all the recompense they can get, > and by the way, we should be thankful to Steve Jobs who gave us Hypercard > (and actually convinced Apple to give it

Re: Stack with the same name loop

On 10/8/21 8:24 AM, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode wrote: Where did you find this script? I am pondering adding this to my "scripts to replace when I download a new version" list. It's in revbackscriptlibrary.livecodescript. Here's an improved version that avoids that double cancel. on

Re: Stack with the same name loop

Hi Jacque, Somewhere back in my history I learned not to copy “open” files in case some important bit of information was just waiting for the file to be properly closed. Given the number of times you have probably done this, I can assume LC is not leaving the copied file in an incomplete

Re: Stack with the same name loop

> On 8 Oct 2021, at 16:08, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode > wrote: > > Actually I never quit LC. I duplicate the file in Finder and then rename the > one I was working on, which is still open in memory. > > I don't often use Save As but when I do I don't see a second copy of the > stack.

Re: Stack with the same name loop

Following convention, the way Word handles Save As is what the majority of apps do. But I have seen an app where save as creates a new file on disk but does NOT open it in memory, completely defying convention! Add to that the confusion Apple introduced with some of their apps, like TextEdit

Re: Stack with the same name loop

Where did you find this script? I am pondering adding this to my "scripts to replace when I download a new version" list. Bob S > On Oct 7, 2021, at 18:51 , Mark Wieder via use-livecode > wrote: > > On 10/7/21 1:08 PM, Mark Wieder via use-livecode wrote: >> How about a fourth option to

Re: Stack with the same name loop

> On Oct 7, 2021, at 14:47 , Mark Wieder via use-livecode > wrote: > > although there seem to be extra calls to "delete stack" which still don't > give me warm fuzzies. I do what everyone else does when that dialog appears: > panic, quit and restart. :-) Do you have some hidden camera in my

Re: Stack with the same name loop

Actually I never quit LC. I duplicate the file in Finder and then rename the one I was working on, which is still open in memory. I don't often use Save As but when I do I don't see a second copy of the stack. But I did notice once that when manually removing a stack from memory it doesn't

Re: Stack with the same name loop

> On Oct 7, 2021, at 5:28 PM, Mark Waddingham via use-livecode > wrote: > > As I said, this isn't anything to do with 'Save As' specifically - 'Save As' > is doing precisely what you would expect... i.e. Saving the stackfile to a > different file, and just as when you do that in any other

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

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

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 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: 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: 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: 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

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: 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: 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

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.

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

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

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: 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

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

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

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: 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

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: 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

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

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 15:38, 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

> 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

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

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 2021-10-06 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: 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: 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: 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

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

On October 6, 2021 9:26:37 PM "Sean Cole \(Pi\) via use-livecode" wrote: I have this thing. I don't know if it's just part of my BPD/EUD or the 48years I've spent on the wrong side of this planet (the outside), I think it's the BPD, but I had to smile at the side of the planet you live on.

Re: Stack with the same name loop

I do something similar but it's a lot less trouble. Save the stack. Go to Finder /Explorer and duplicate it. Rename the copy. Go back to LC and carry on with the original. You can update the name or any properties there. Occasionally as I work I realize that I've implemented a lot of

Re: Stack with the same name loop

[Huff] and [sigh]! I don't know. I mean, I just don't get it. I don't get how LiveCode get defended as being people that care when they leave something as *basic as this unrepaired for EIGHTTEENYEARS !?! I have this thing. I don't know if it's just part of my BPD/EUD or the 48years I've

Re: Stack with the same name loop

My process has become: Save the file in LiveCode. Close the file from LiveCode, purge from memory. Switch to Finder (Mac) or Windows Explorer, or QUIT LiveCode, Duplicate and rename the file, Open the new file, Return to LiveCode, Rename the file in stack properties, if there isa version number in

Re: Stack with the same name loop

On the bright side, it isn't as confusing as the one that tells you the script has been changed in an external editor, even if it wasn't, and then you don't know whether to keep what you're looking at or take a chance and reload. You can lose work by choosing the wrong button. -- Jacqueline

Re: Stack with the same name loop

On 10/6/21 1:22 PM, Eraklis Pittas via use-livecode wrote: I just put up with it and kill LC - I don't think we will ever have a definitive answer or fix (prove me wrong please!) . As I say they don't seem to eat their own Dog Food otherwise this would have been sorted years ago. That's what

Re: Stack with the same name loop

Hi Sean, I just put up with it and kill LC - I don't think we will ever have a definitive answer or fix (prove me wrong please!) . As I say they don't seem to eat their own Dog Food otherwise this would have been sorted years ago. While I'm here Somehow the problem with the drop down menus on

Re: Stack with the same name loop

hehe  Sean On Wed, 6 Oct 2021 at 18:37, Jim MacConnell via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > +1 > > > On Oct 6, 2021, at 10:24 AM, Tom Glod via use-livecode < > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > > > > LOL. me too whenever I get this, I just unplug my comp

Re: Stack with the same name loop

That's the question of the century that has puzzled most of us. I always tap Purge and it works. As far as I know: Cancel: don't load the new stack, keep the open one, do nothing else Purge: close the open one and remove from memory, open the new stack Save: It's unclear. Save the new one and

Re: Stack with the same name loop

+1 > On Oct 6, 2021, at 10:24 AM, Tom Glod via use-livecode > wrote: > > LOL. me too whenever I get this, I just unplug my comp from the > wall, leave the room, wait for 5 minutes and only then try again. :D > > On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 1:18 PM Peter Bogdanoff via use-livecode < >

Re: Stack with the same name loop

LOL. me too whenever I get this, I just unplug my comp from the wall, leave the room, wait for 5 minutes and only then try again. :D On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 1:18 PM Peter Bogdanoff via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > Good question. I have no idea either. > > > On

Re: Stack with the same name loop

Good question. I have no idea either. > On Oct 6, 2021, at 12:56 PM, Sean Cole (Pi) via use-livecode > wrote: > > Hi all, > Can someone give the definitive answer as to what to choose when I save my > stack with a save as to create a new iterative version and it comes up with > the prompt : >