Peter Haworth wrote:
> Richard - Thanks for the pointer to the bug report, I will add a note
> too. The whole "backwards compatibility" thing is a sorry excuse, at
> most of the time. RunRev make changes all the time that cause things
> to behave differently.
Actually, it's pretty rare that they change the behavior of tokens that
have been in the language for a long time. Can you name three examples?
I might be able to, but I can't think of that many offhand. The only
one that comes to mind was the change to the way messages pass through
shared groups, but there - as with this one - the change was so
unquestionably beneficial that it was worth updating my apps to accommodate.
Given the level of angst I hear from Python users ("Should I use v2 or
v3?"), it seems RunRev does a better job than most in maintaining
backward compatibility.
> I guess I'm left with no choice but to chase up the owner hierarchy,
> at least if I detect that the control name is empty.
You are indeed behind in your emails - Mark Waddingham has already put
this into the queue to be fixed:
<http://lists.runrev.com/pipermail/use-livecode/2013-January/181860.html>
Of course that won't affect users of older versions, so your tool may be
the only case where we have code in the community dependent on the old
behavior. ;)
Prepare to fork, for the benefit of all future users.
--
Richard Gaskin
Fourth World
LiveCode training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com
Webzine for LiveCode developers: http://www.LiveCodeJournal.com
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/FourthWorldSys
_______________________________________________
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
