Thank you for your reply, Monte. Comments inline:
Monte Goulding wrote:
>> On 7 Apr 2022, at 11:25 am, Richard Gaskin wrote:
>> Can you help me understand how it's better than "the properties",
>> and why this superior method isn't used for engine controls?
>
> Because the array created by export and used by import contains
> the state of the widget as is saved when saving the stack. The
> content may or may not be the same as the property names exposed
> to user scripts but a widget created with that state should be
> the same as if it were saved in the stack and the stack re-opened.
I've never used a widget in production yet, so I can't say I have an
opinion there. If the uses for widgets are viewed as sufficiently
different from engine-based controls that "the properties" so many of us
enjoy wouldn't apply, I'm okay with that. Just looking to understand.
>> That the company has such a narrowly specific view of the
>> applicability of "the properties" is indeed helpful. Thank
>> you for chiming in.
>
> I’m not the company.
Pardon my imprecision. I think the readers here are likely aware that
the company is comprised of many people, and there are likely many
different opinions on a wide range of topics, including this. Please
read that as "a significant member of the company".
> Mark may spend a lot more time pondering the utility of `the
> properties` than I do and indeed may have a different opinion.
> Indeed my opinion was much closer to yours is now when I sent
> in a PR for LC 6.1 all those years ago ;-)
One of the challenges with a tool as vastly capable as LiveCode is
wrapping one's head around all the use-cases, and all the perceived
priorities. Various members of the company and the community have
expressed a wide range of opinions on many things.
If "the properties" winds up being like the pointer tool requests I used
to ask about, no worries. I stopped asking about those years ago.
Indeed, even with "the properties" I've had a few discussions on this
with different team members going back to Dr Brett, back when LCB was in
its earliest stages.
In my own mind having two different methods for obtaining property data
for two classes of objects is akin to having two different words for
"rect" or other basic features. Where a useful implementation has been
chosen and established so long ago, it seems worth mirroring in new
implementations.
But TBH, since I haven't used widgets in production at all, the only
time it comes to mind is when someone asks me about it for one of my
tools, or in discussions like this one. This seemed a good time to see
what the current vision is. I appreciate the clarity provided.
>> How hard would it be for the team to map the existing means of
>> extracting widget properties to "the properties”?
>
> I don’t think it would be particularly tricky to iterate the exported
> property definitions to come up with a list of property names then
> turn that into a key/value array. Whether it would provide the utility
> you are looking for is a separate question.
If it does what "the properties" does it would suit my needs.
--
Richard Gaskin
Fourth World Systems
Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
____________________________________________________________________
ambassa...@fourthworld.com http://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
