On 12/7/06, Richard Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Looking for suggestions on how to have 2 or 3 Rev standalones talk to one another (under Windows). These separate Rev apps cannot share the same engine. Perhaps it's quite easy and I'm just overlooking it.
OK, I'm a hobbyist I'll stick my head out, but all the solutions here seem to be overly complex for what appears to only require local processing at the speed of button clicking. I use a method that is easy and seems to be overlooked. I regularly send large amounts of data between 2 Standalones, you can: set the myCustomProp of stack "Standalone No 2" to tMyLargeAmountData -- if you just want the data to be available in Stack 2 for later use. If you want to start a process and send data to another stack it's pretty simple to: send hHandlerInAnotherStack tMyLargeAmountData to stack "Standalone 2" I only do this between two stacks, so specifying 'to stack "ABC" or 'to stack "DEF" is pretty easy, but I imagine that if you were working with 4 or 5 standalones it might be simpler to create a library stack, of which all 5 use, and then include 3 parameters with your handlers, the long Name of the Originating object, the long Name of the Destination object, the data The only problem with this is possible queuing conflicts. I don't know what will happen. In my case I click a button in Standalone 1 and in the background something happens in Standalone 2. If I go to Standalone 2 I can do things that change things in Standalone 1. If I click in Standalone 1 to start the process in Standalone 2, and then immediately go to Standalone 2 and it hasn't finished processing then I get the usual busy cursor. I can either click back to Standalone 1 and do something whilst Standalone 2 is crunching away or I can stay in Standalone 2 and wait for it to finish, then proceed. What I don't know is if you have 5 Standalones, and you click in Standalone 1 and it starts a process in Standalone 2 which runs a process in 3, which runs a process in 4, which runs a process in 5 which sends a message back to 1. If 1 is idle, it will be activated and everything will work. But if you commenced a Standalone 1 process and it is 'busy' and Standalone 5 sends a message to 1, I don't know if the queued message will be handled correctly. Actually I'm sure a couple of queued messages would be correctly dealt with, it is whether you have 100s of messages from different Standalones all queued whether they'll be handled correctly. I guess that's why everyone else has come up with more complex options, but depending on your needs, 'of stack "ABC" ' and 'send' maybe all you need:-) In my case I'm certainly no 'clicker at the speed of an sms sending teenager', so there is plenty of idle time in Standalone1 to catch 'send' from Standalone 2 and vica versa. I'm sure those in the know will tell me what other 'gotchas' exist with this method:-) _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [email protected] Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
