Sounds like a great idea to me. I seem to remember that one of dispatch/send is blocking and the other isn't. Could that be a possible reason for the lack of "in" with dispatch?
Pete lcSQL Software On Aug 26, 2014 7:09 PM, "Richard Gaskin" <ambassa...@fourthworld.com> wrote: > I love "dispatch", and the more I use it the more I find "send" murky. > > With "dispatch" params seem more natural to me: > > dispatch "somecommand" to tSomeObj with tArg2, tArg2 > > But with "send" it's less clear how params are handled - here's an example > from the forums today: > > send clearVideo LayerAlpha, baseLayer, LayerGraphic, \ > LayerAudio to me in 700 milliseconds > > Seems like a good guess as to how it should be used, but of course the > compiler complains. > > So given that "dispatch" is also faster, why not use it for everything, > extending it with "in" to allow timers: > > dispatch "somecommand" to tSomeObj with tArg2, tArg2 in 2 secs > > Is there some reason I've overlooked as to why "send" allows timers but > "dispatch" doesn't? > > -- > 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 > _______________________________________________ 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
