stephen barncard wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
>> I've grown weary of stack name conflict over the years, and this
>> morning decided to take some time to assess where we're really at
>> with that and see if perhaps there's a way to handle things more
>> liberally than how the IDE does now.
>> TL/DR version: It seems there's actually no real problem at all.
> Thanks Richard, this has been driving me nuts since.... the first day
> I used Revolution, and it was terrifying. Most of the time I just
> forced quit.
> One wonders how many 'solutions to non-problems' are there still
> working in LC? Things we've been doing for years...
I should clarify that by "no real problem at all" I'm thinking in terms
of sharing stacks among potentially-large teams of people who know what
they're doing. In my workflow, learning the rule of stack name
resolution isn't a big price to pay for the simplicity and flexibility
of being able to work on anything at any time regardless of its name.
So more specifically, it's fine *in the engine*.
But the *IDE* has different responsibilities.
I didn't close my feature request yet because I'm undecided about the
best way to provide useful guidance for new users who might spend all
day working on the wrong stack without some sort of warning.
Like you, I've had issues trying to use the existing dialog, never quite
certain what either option will do before I pick one, and never quite
sure it did what I thought it would do after I clicked it. And like
you, I've usually found it at least mentally simpler to quit and start
with a fresh session.
But perhaps there's another option we haven't yet considered, one which
provides sufficient guidance so folks know which stack they're working
on, but perhaps less ominous and complex than the solution in place now.
Fourth World Systems
Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
use-livecode mailing list
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription