There is one issue of which I am aware and for which I have no a satisfactory solution:
sharing library handlers that manipulate declared local variables.
[snip] To this point I've just shrugged it off
Thank you, Dar, for causing me to give the issue more thought.
I now conclude it is NOT an issue to the extent I feared, and I hope someone will confirm my fears are unfounded. Here's my reasoning:
When SDB Client A standalone starts using Serendipity Library, a copy of the Library stack is loaded in RAM assigned to Client A standalone.
When SDB Client B standalone starts using Serendipity Library, a copy of the Library stack is loaded in RAM assigned to Client B standalone.
So when Client A changes the value of a declared local variable, it does NOT affect the value of the same variable from the perspective of the other standalone.
Note this still creates an issue if multiple client stacks are managed by a single standalone; but it seems, in theory, that a single copy of Serendipity Library CAN provide resources to ALL Revolution standalones that don't open more than one SDB client stack at a time, whether on the same computer or anywhere on a LAN.
I must say, the prospect of being able to update the operation of every Revolution standalone on every workstation on the network by changing a single handler & resource library stack on one workstation excites me.
...but perhaps my goals are not as "ambitious" as Andy Ihnatko's. :{`)
--Rob Cozens CCW, Serendipity Software Company http://www.oenolog.net/who.htm
"And I, which was two fooles, do so grow three; Who are a little wise, the best fooles bee."
from "The Triple Foole" by John Donne (1572-1631) _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
