> It's not a bug, it was intentionally introduced to allow a couple
> of features, like retaining script local variables after a build.
> Given the amount of extra scripting to work around it for existing
> stacks, I think it may have introduced more problems than it tried
> to cure.

Agreed! I was too busy the other day but wanted to chime in:
This was a baffling case of doubling-down on a wonky and toxic "fix."

The problems introduced were far more numerous than those "fixed."
I pointed this out right away, but it seems that hubris prevailed.
LC Ltd needs a more consistent vision of what LC is and how it works.

Result: workarounds are often needed for standard builds.
In what RAD paradigm should users have to workaround the IDE?
If that's a question we're even needing to ask, we may be in trouble.

(My own stack design usually makes this a moot point. I wasn't affected.
But I saw the expense and pain this caused, plus a troubling precedent.)

So ... isn't it great they teach everyone to double down these days?  :)
Turning off messages - good tactic, although it won't work for everyone.

Back to work, take care all....

Best wishes,

Curry Kenworthy

Custom Software Development
"Better Methods, Better Results"
LiveCode Training and Consulting

use-livecode mailing list
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 

Reply via email to