>The concept is good, but the terminology would have to change.
>"Library" is already used in several ways in MetaCard for OMO
>compatibilities (there is a "libraries" function that's the same as
>stacksInUse, a "library" command that's like "start using", a
>"libraryStack" message sent when a stack is added as a library, and a
>"releaseStack" sent when a stack is removed as a library).
Scott,
Since it's basically the same concept, why don't use that and name it
something like "autoLibraries". Then it'll at least be consistent. Or maybe
the "autoUseObjects" if we're going to stick with HC. "autoInserted..."
would probably raise the question where it'll be inserted. Maybe
autoFrontScripts and autoBackScripts? I need some help thinking about
those. What do you say?
>This is very similar to the "parent script" concept discussed earlier,
>although your example provides for multiple "parents" and uses
>terminology and behavior more similar to what's already available
>(perhaps too similar in the case of terminology).
I think we should keep the word "parent" back for now. I have a feeling
that when Kevin gets out of his NDA either by HC3 being shipped or killed,
we might need it. Although HC already has the concept of "owners". At least
I'd keep it for an object hierarchy, maybe inheritance etc, not for
libraries. Also, since this feature is basically the same as start using, I
don't see where employing the same terminology would hurt.
>messages
>would have to be sent to your "libraries" at either before the current
>object's script or after it had passed all the way through the message
>passing heirarchy, whereas parent scripts (I presume) would get the
>message immediately after the target. I think the latter would
>probably be more useful.
That's why I'd like to use "libraries" to set it apart from "start using".
I guess it'd be the best to use SC/MC backScript/frontScript terminology
here. Wouldn't it be cool if I could write:
insert script of cd btn 5 after cd btn 4
? No it wouldn't, it'd be a debugging nightmare. That's why I think this
property is best. If we establish that there are frontScripts, backScripts
and autoInserted scripts, and that one intercepts everything, one is
intercepted by everything, and the last intercepts immediately after one
object, it sounds like a sensible collection to me.
If you want more control about what handler is called, we might need to
drag Dan out here and ask him to contribute to extending "pass through" to
include an object specification.
Cheers,
-- M. Uli Kusterer
------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.weblayout.com/witness
'The Witnesses of TeachText are everywhere...'
--- HELP SAVE HYPERCARD: ---
Details at: http://www.hyperactivesw.com/SaveHC.html
Sign: http://www.giguere.uqam.ca/petition/hcpetition.html
