Re: Do script-only stacks support "chained" behaviors?
Heisenbug -- as far as I remember the last twenty minutes, the sequence of edits was: 1. Answer commands die without warning 2. Wrap the problematic answer commands in a try...catch structure. 3. Run the command; get no error from the try, and the command runs all the way through. 4. Comment out the try...catch structure, leaving the answer commands in place. 5. Run the command; no errors, everything works fine. So...something changed, obviously, but I have no idea what. Testing now... On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 10:35 PM, Geoff Canyon wrote: > Double-grrr. I put the warning dialogs in the menuPick handler instead of > the conversion handler, and it works fine. That's *not* where the warnings > should be, since it means that it's possible to call the conversion handler > and receive no warnings. I'm testing further. Once I'm comfortable enough > to try it on (a copy of) Navigator itself, I'll post an update. > > gc > > On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 10:22 PM, Geoff Canyon wrote: > >> Also, status update: grr. I'm finding that the answer dialog I'm using to >> warn the user that the script conversion process is dangerous and to work >> on a backup is causing my script to die, no warning, and no error message. >> The exact same script *not* running in Navigator works fine. Answer dialogs >> in other Navigator handlers also work fine. I have zero idea why this might >> be. Other than this I'd be testing away and releasing :-( >> > ___ 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
Re: Do script-only stacks support "chained" behaviors?
Another key difference in our implementations that I find fascinating: you create script-only stacks by creating the stacks, then saving the stacks. I created them by constructing a variable with the text contents of the stacks, then writing that out to files with put into url etc. On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 3:30 PM, Monte Goulding via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > Cool, scriptifier was/is just a tool I wrote because it took about the > same about of time to write as to tediously scriptify a stack so I thought > it would be a win in the end. If anyone is keen to make it more robust or > start from scratch then have at it. FWIW it would probably be a good idea > to check scriptified scripts for the conditional messages that are only > sent if an object has them (idle, mouseStillDown etc) and warn about > scriptifying those. We got caught with idle in an old script in an IDE > stack once. > > Cheers > > Monte ___ 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
Re: Do script-only stacks support "chained" behaviors?
Double-grrr. I put the warning dialogs in the menuPick handler instead of the conversion handler, and it works fine. That's *not* where the warnings should be, since it means that it's possible to call the conversion handler and receive no warnings. I'm testing further. Once I'm comfortable enough to try it on (a copy of) Navigator itself, I'll post an update. gc On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 10:22 PM, Geoff Canyon wrote: > Also, status update: grr. I'm finding that the answer dialog I'm using to > warn the user that the script conversion process is dangerous and to work > on a backup is causing my script to die, no warning, and no error message. > The exact same script *not* running in Navigator works fine. Answer dialogs > in other Navigator handlers also work fine. I have zero idea why this might > be. Other than this I'd be testing away and releasing :-( > ___ 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
Re: Do script-only stacks support "chained" behaviors?
Also, status update: grr. I'm finding that the answer dialog I'm using to warn the user that the script conversion process is dangerous and to work on a backup is causing my script to die, no warning, and no error message. The exact same script *not* running in Navigator works fine. Answer dialogs in other Navigator handlers also work fine. I have zero idea why this might be. Other than this I'd be testing away and releasing :-( On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 10:19 PM, Geoff Canyon wrote: > It occurs to me that this isn't as much of a problem as I thought -- any > button being converted to a stack is highly unlikely to have an openstack > handler already in it, and therefore it would be safe to add one and > include setting the behavior of the script-only stack to the appropriate > stack up the chain. If there were already an openstack handler in the > chain, then the conversion process could stop at that point, or perhaps log > the error to the user. Unless I'm missing something? > > On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 5:15 PM, Trevor DeVore via use-livecode < > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > >> On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 6:43 PM Geoff Canyon wrote: >> >> > Well that's too bad for anyone who's currently using chained behaviors >> and >> > wants to use source control (i.e. convert to script-only stacks). >> > >> Yes it is. >> >> For now I just set the chained behaviors for any script only stacks that >> require them when the app starts up. Not ideal, but worth it in order to >> manage the scripts with source control. >> >> Trevor DeVore >> ScreenSteps >> ___ >> 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
Re: Do script-only stacks support "chained" behaviors?
It occurs to me that this isn't as much of a problem as I thought -- any button being converted to a stack is highly unlikely to have an openstack handler already in it, and therefore it would be safe to add one and include setting the behavior of the script-only stack to the appropriate stack up the chain. If there were already an openstack handler in the chain, then the conversion process could stop at that point, or perhaps log the error to the user. Unless I'm missing something? On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 5:15 PM, Trevor DeVore via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 6:43 PM Geoff Canyon wrote: > > > Well that's too bad for anyone who's currently using chained behaviors > and > > wants to use source control (i.e. convert to script-only stacks). > > > Yes it is. > > For now I just set the chained behaviors for any script only stacks that > require them when the app starts up. Not ideal, but worth it in order to > manage the scripts with source control. > > Trevor DeVore > ScreenSteps > ___ > 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
Re: Do script-only stacks support "chained" behaviors?
How does Levure organize SOS's? The present setup already allows the user to specify a target folder into which to place the newly created stacks, and correctly sets the relative path in the stackfiles property. On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 1:34 PM, Mike Kerner via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > As long as you're at it, it would be cool if you added an option to > organize the SOS's the way Levure would. I was working on Scriptifier to > do the same thing, but I haven't gotten around to finishing it. If > Navigator does it, then I can just stop fiddling with my hack. > > On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 2:28 AM, Geoff Canyon via use-livecode < > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > > > At a fundamental level (unless I'm misreading it) Scriptifier parses a > > whole stack and looks for objects with a script and no behavior, and > turns > > them into an object with no script and a script-only stack behavior. > > Navigator will work on whatever controls you tell it to, and will look > for > > objects with a script and no behavior, and turn them into an object with > no > > script and a script-only stack behavior, but it will also find objects > with > > a button behavior (that does not itself have a behavior), and create a > > script-only stack with that button's script, and set those objects' > > behavior to the resulting stacks (and the original button, so if there > are > > unconverted controls, they'll still work. I'm definitely going to have to > > add an "and enclosed controls" option in Navigator. There are several > other > > differences, as there always will be when two different people look at a > > problem. > > > > On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 11:01 PM, Geoff Canyon > wrote: > > > > > I built my own, for several reasons, among them: > > > > > > 1. In the context of Navigator, I needed to support creating stack > > > behaviors for an arbitrary collection of controls, rather than > recursing > > > through a stack. > > > 2. I figured that Monte and I would approach the task differently, and > we > > > did on several fronts. > > > 3. I thought it would be fun to code. (and it was, I royally borked my > > > first implementation in the product definition phase) > > > > > > I just ran my first test, and it seems to be working. > > > > > > I'm going to build some more tests for it, then release it with stern > > > warnings that anyone using it on a non-backed-up project is foolish, > and > > I > > > am not responsible for the horrible things they do with it. It should > be > > > available sometime tomorrow. > > > > > > gc > > > > > > On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Mike Kerner via use-livecode < > > > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > > > > > >> Dumb question, Geoff, are you going to embed/call Scriptifier to > achieve > > >> that or are you going to do something else? > > >> > > >> On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 8:25 PM, Geoff Canyon via use-livecode < > > >> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > > >> > > >> > I get that it can be done, I just hesitate to start monkeying with > > >> people's > > >> > scripts like that in Navigator (which is going to have a conversion > > >> > function in the next update). For now I'm thinking that I just skip > > >> > anything with chained behaviors, unless someone has a better > > suggestion. > > >> > > > >> > On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 5:15 PM, Trevor DeVore via use-livecode < > > >> > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > For now I just set the chained behaviors for any script only > stacks > > >> that > > >> > > require them when the app starts up. Not ideal, but worth it in > > order > > >> to > > >> > > manage the scripts with source control. > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > ___ > > >> > 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 > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> On the first day, God created the heavens and the Earth > > >> On the second day, God created the oceans. > > >> On the third day, God put the animals on hold for a few hours, > > >>and did a little diving. > > >> And God said, "This is good." > > >> ___ > > >> 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 > > > > > > -- > On the first day, God created the heavens and the Earth > On the second day, God created the ocean
Re: Do script-only stacks support "chained" behaviors?
That's a nice idea about the warnings. On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 3:30 PM, Monte Goulding via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > Cool, scriptifier was/is just a tool I wrote because it took about the > same about of time to write as to tediously scriptify a stack so I thought > it would be a win in the end. If anyone is keen to make it more robust or > start from scratch then have at it. FWIW it would probably be a good idea > to check scriptified scripts for the conditional messages that are only > sent if an object has them (idle, mouseStillDown etc) and warn about > scriptifying those. We got caught with idle in an old script in an IDE > stack once. > > Cheers > > Monte > > > On 21 Jan 2018, at 6:28 pm, Geoff Canyon via use-livecode < > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > > > > At a fundamental level (unless I'm misreading it) Scriptifier parses a > > whole stack and looks for objects with a script and no behavior, and > turns > > them into an object with no script and a script-only stack behavior. > > Navigator will work on whatever controls you tell it to, and will look > for > > objects with a script and no behavior, and turn them into an object with > no > > script and a script-only stack behavior, but it will also find objects > with > > a button behavior (that does not itself have a behavior), and create a > > script-only stack with that button's script, and set those objects' > > behavior to the resulting stacks (and the original button, so if there > are > > unconverted controls, they'll still work. I'm definitely going to have to > > add an "and enclosed controls" option in Navigator. There are several > other > > differences, as there always will be when two different people look at a > > problem. > > > > On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 11:01 PM, Geoff Canyon > wrote: > > > >> I built my own, for several reasons, among them: > >> > >> 1. In the context of Navigator, I needed to support creating stack > >> behaviors for an arbitrary collection of controls, rather than recursing > >> through a stack. > >> 2. I figured that Monte and I would approach the task differently, and > we > >> did on several fronts. > >> 3. I thought it would be fun to code. (and it was, I royally borked my > >> first implementation in the product definition phase) > >> > >> I just ran my first test, and it seems to be working. > >> > >> I'm going to build some more tests for it, then release it with stern > >> warnings that anyone using it on a non-backed-up project is foolish, > and I > >> am not responsible for the horrible things they do with it. It should be > >> available sometime tomorrow. > >> > >> gc > >> > >> On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Mike Kerner via use-livecode < > >> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > >> > >>> Dumb question, Geoff, are you going to embed/call Scriptifier to > achieve > >>> that or are you going to do something else? > >>> > >>> On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 8:25 PM, Geoff Canyon via use-livecode < > >>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > >>> > I get that it can be done, I just hesitate to start monkeying with > >>> people's > scripts like that in Navigator (which is going to have a conversion > function in the next update). For now I'm thinking that I just skip > anything with chained behaviors, unless someone has a better > suggestion. > > On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 5:15 PM, Trevor DeVore via use-livecode < > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > > > > For now I just set the chained behaviors for any script only stacks > >>> that > > require them when the app starts up. Not ideal, but worth it in order > >>> to > > manage the scripts with source control. > > > > > ___ > 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 > > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> On the first day, God created the heavens and the Earth > >>> On the second day, God created the oceans. > >>> On the third day, God put the animals on hold for a few hours, > >>> and did a little diving. > >>> And God said, "This is good." > >>> ___ > >>> 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 > > > ___ > use-livecode mailing list > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com > Please vis
Re: Do script-only stacks support "chained" behaviors?
Cool, scriptifier was/is just a tool I wrote because it took about the same about of time to write as to tediously scriptify a stack so I thought it would be a win in the end. If anyone is keen to make it more robust or start from scratch then have at it. FWIW it would probably be a good idea to check scriptified scripts for the conditional messages that are only sent if an object has them (idle, mouseStillDown etc) and warn about scriptifying those. We got caught with idle in an old script in an IDE stack once. Cheers Monte > On 21 Jan 2018, at 6:28 pm, Geoff Canyon via use-livecode > wrote: > > At a fundamental level (unless I'm misreading it) Scriptifier parses a > whole stack and looks for objects with a script and no behavior, and turns > them into an object with no script and a script-only stack behavior. > Navigator will work on whatever controls you tell it to, and will look for > objects with a script and no behavior, and turn them into an object with no > script and a script-only stack behavior, but it will also find objects with > a button behavior (that does not itself have a behavior), and create a > script-only stack with that button's script, and set those objects' > behavior to the resulting stacks (and the original button, so if there are > unconverted controls, they'll still work. I'm definitely going to have to > add an "and enclosed controls" option in Navigator. There are several other > differences, as there always will be when two different people look at a > problem. > > On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 11:01 PM, Geoff Canyon wrote: > >> I built my own, for several reasons, among them: >> >> 1. In the context of Navigator, I needed to support creating stack >> behaviors for an arbitrary collection of controls, rather than recursing >> through a stack. >> 2. I figured that Monte and I would approach the task differently, and we >> did on several fronts. >> 3. I thought it would be fun to code. (and it was, I royally borked my >> first implementation in the product definition phase) >> >> I just ran my first test, and it seems to be working. >> >> I'm going to build some more tests for it, then release it with stern >> warnings that anyone using it on a non-backed-up project is foolish, and I >> am not responsible for the horrible things they do with it. It should be >> available sometime tomorrow. >> >> gc >> >> On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Mike Kerner via use-livecode < >> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: >> >>> Dumb question, Geoff, are you going to embed/call Scriptifier to achieve >>> that or are you going to do something else? >>> >>> On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 8:25 PM, Geoff Canyon via use-livecode < >>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: >>> I get that it can be done, I just hesitate to start monkeying with >>> people's scripts like that in Navigator (which is going to have a conversion function in the next update). For now I'm thinking that I just skip anything with chained behaviors, unless someone has a better suggestion. On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 5:15 PM, Trevor DeVore via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > > For now I just set the chained behaviors for any script only stacks >>> that > require them when the app starts up. Not ideal, but worth it in order >>> to > manage the scripts with source control. > > ___ 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 >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> On the first day, God created the heavens and the Earth >>> On the second day, God created the oceans. >>> On the third day, God put the animals on hold for a few hours, >>> and did a little diving. >>> And God said, "This is good." >>> ___ >>> 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 ___ 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
Re: Do script-only stacks support "chained" behaviors?
As long as you're at it, it would be cool if you added an option to organize the SOS's the way Levure would. I was working on Scriptifier to do the same thing, but I haven't gotten around to finishing it. If Navigator does it, then I can just stop fiddling with my hack. On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 2:28 AM, Geoff Canyon via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > At a fundamental level (unless I'm misreading it) Scriptifier parses a > whole stack and looks for objects with a script and no behavior, and turns > them into an object with no script and a script-only stack behavior. > Navigator will work on whatever controls you tell it to, and will look for > objects with a script and no behavior, and turn them into an object with no > script and a script-only stack behavior, but it will also find objects with > a button behavior (that does not itself have a behavior), and create a > script-only stack with that button's script, and set those objects' > behavior to the resulting stacks (and the original button, so if there are > unconverted controls, they'll still work. I'm definitely going to have to > add an "and enclosed controls" option in Navigator. There are several other > differences, as there always will be when two different people look at a > problem. > > On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 11:01 PM, Geoff Canyon wrote: > > > I built my own, for several reasons, among them: > > > > 1. In the context of Navigator, I needed to support creating stack > > behaviors for an arbitrary collection of controls, rather than recursing > > through a stack. > > 2. I figured that Monte and I would approach the task differently, and we > > did on several fronts. > > 3. I thought it would be fun to code. (and it was, I royally borked my > > first implementation in the product definition phase) > > > > I just ran my first test, and it seems to be working. > > > > I'm going to build some more tests for it, then release it with stern > > warnings that anyone using it on a non-backed-up project is foolish, and > I > > am not responsible for the horrible things they do with it. It should be > > available sometime tomorrow. > > > > gc > > > > On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Mike Kerner via use-livecode < > > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > > > >> Dumb question, Geoff, are you going to embed/call Scriptifier to achieve > >> that or are you going to do something else? > >> > >> On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 8:25 PM, Geoff Canyon via use-livecode < > >> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > >> > >> > I get that it can be done, I just hesitate to start monkeying with > >> people's > >> > scripts like that in Navigator (which is going to have a conversion > >> > function in the next update). For now I'm thinking that I just skip > >> > anything with chained behaviors, unless someone has a better > suggestion. > >> > > >> > On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 5:15 PM, Trevor DeVore via use-livecode < > >> > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > >> > > > >> > > For now I just set the chained behaviors for any script only stacks > >> that > >> > > require them when the app starts up. Not ideal, but worth it in > order > >> to > >> > > manage the scripts with source control. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > ___ > >> > 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 > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> On the first day, God created the heavens and the Earth > >> On the second day, God created the oceans. > >> On the third day, God put the animals on hold for a few hours, > >>and did a little diving. > >> And God said, "This is good." > >> ___ > >> 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 > -- On the first day, God created the heavens and the Earth On the second day, God created the oceans. On the third day, God put the animals on hold for a few hours, and did a little diving. And God said, "This is good." ___ 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
Re: Switcheroo
Thank you very much: I'll get back to work. Richmond. On 21/1/2018 6:35 pm, Mike Bonner via use-livecode wrote: You aren't actually providing a line number. Try this.. repeat with i = 1 to the number of lines in field "mm" switch (line i of fld "mm" is empty) case true break case false break end switch end repeat Though if you have a LOT of lines you'd be better off adjusting it to use repeat for each and running a separate counter... put 1 into tCounter repeat for each line tLine in field "mm switch (tLine is empty) case true -- the line is empty, tcounter contains the number of the line break case false -- the line is NOT empty, tcounter contains the number of the line break end switch add 1 to tCounter -- increment to keep tCounter in sync with the line number end repeat On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 9:09 AM, Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: I have a list field where each line may contain a number or be empty. I need a SWITCH statement that checks the state of each line . . . This is throwing a "bluey": switch line number of fld "MM" is empty Where am I going wrong? Richmond. ___ 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 ___ 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
Re: How I learned to love and use auto quotes & parentheses with LC 9 DP11
Speaking of auto-insertions, is there something in 9dp11 that blocks
cmd-shift-space? A custom insertion I use no longer works.
--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
On January 21, 2018 8:11:09 AM Martin Koob via use-livecode
wrote:
Maybe I am the last person to know this but if you don't this may be helpful.
I was getting frustrated with the new feature that automatically puts the
end quote when you type the initial quote.
It works fine if you are typing the initial quote first and then the text
contained within the quote.
i.e. if I wanted to type myCleverFunction("my string")
when I type
myCleverFunction(
script editor would complete the parentheses to give you
myCleverFunction()
with the cursor between the parentheses.
Then when I type an initial quote and I would get
myCleverFunction("")
with my cursor between the quotes so I could type the text in the quotes. So
that works great.
What would drive me nuts was if I had to go back in a line of script after
it had been typed and add quotes or parentheses around some text already
there.
If I typed an initial quote I would get this:
""put in quotes
Instead of what I wanted:
"put in quotes
So I would have to delete one of the quotes then put my cursor at the end of
the string and type the quote and again get this.
"put in quotes""
Again I have to delete one of the quotes.
Then by accident I found how you are actually supposed to do it.
Select the text 'put in quotes' then type the quote and the quotes will be
put at the beginning and end of the selection.
The same works for open parenthesis '(' and open square bracket '['.
That saves a keystroke and some mousing around to get the second quote
insertion point over the old way with out the auto complete.
I did a quick search but could not find this in the documentation so thought
I would post that epiphany here.
Happy quoting.
Martin Koob
--
Sent from:
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Revolution-User-f278306.html
___
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
Re: Switcheroo
You aren't actually providing a line number. Try this.. repeat with i = 1 to the number of lines in field "mm" switch (line i of fld "mm" is empty) case true break case false break end switch end repeat Though if you have a LOT of lines you'd be better off adjusting it to use repeat for each and running a separate counter... put 1 into tCounter repeat for each line tLine in field "mm switch (tLine is empty) case true -- the line is empty, tcounter contains the number of the line break case false -- the line is NOT empty, tcounter contains the number of the line break end switch add 1 to tCounter -- increment to keep tCounter in sync with the line number end repeat On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 9:09 AM, Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > I have a list field where each line may contain a number or be empty. > > I need a SWITCH statement that checks the state of each line . . . > > This is throwing a "bluey": > > switch line number of fld "MM" is empty > > Where am I going wrong? > > Richmond. > ___ > 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
Switcheroo
I have a list field where each line may contain a number or be empty. I need a SWITCH statement that checks the state of each line . . . This is throwing a "bluey": switch line number of fld "MM" is empty Where am I going wrong? Richmond. ___ 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
Re: How I learned to love and use auto quotes & parentheses with LC 9 DP11
Martin,
thanks for this information. Helps me to like this completion option much more.
Matthias
> Am 21.01.2018 um 15:08 schrieb Martin Koob via use-livecode
> mailto:use-livecode@lists.runrev.com>>:
>
> Maybe I am the last person to know this but if you don't this may be helpful.
>
> I was getting frustrated with the new feature that automatically puts the
> end quote when you type the initial quote.
>
> It works fine if you are typing the initial quote first and then the text
> contained within the quote.
> i.e. if I wanted to type myCleverFunction("my string")
>
> when I type
>
> myCleverFunction(
>
> script editor would complete the parentheses to give you
>
> myCleverFunction()
>
> with the cursor between the parentheses.
>
> Then when I type an initial quote and I would get
>
> myCleverFunction("")
>
> with my cursor between the quotes so I could type the text in the quotes. So
> that works great.
>
> What would drive me nuts was if I had to go back in a line of script after
> it had been typed and add quotes or parentheses around some text already
> there.
>
> If I typed an initial quote I would get this:
>
> ""put in quotes
>
> Instead of what I wanted:
>
> "put in quotes
>
> So I would have to delete one of the quotes then put my cursor at the end of
> the string and type the quote and again get this.
>
> "put in quotes""
>
> Again I have to delete one of the quotes.
>
> Then by accident I found how you are actually supposed to do it.
>
> Select the text 'put in quotes' then type the quote and the quotes will be
> put at the beginning and end of the selection.
>
> The same works for open parenthesis '(' and open square bracket '['.
>
> That saves a keystroke and some mousing around to get the second quote
> insertion point over the old way with out the auto complete.
>
> I did a quick search but could not find this in the documentation so thought
> I would post that epiphany here.
>
> Happy quoting.
>
> Martin Koob
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from:
> http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Revolution-User-f278306.html
>
>
> ___
> 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
Re: How I learned to love and use auto quotes & parentheses with LC 9 DP11
One other useful tidbit is that it will skip over the ending quote if you
type it... so when you type “ and get “|”, you can type “text|” and then
the next quote will skip over the automatically added one. (“|” is the
insertion point)
On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 8:09 AM Martin Koob via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> Maybe I am the last person to know this but if you don't this may be
> helpful.
>
> I was getting frustrated with the new feature that automatically puts the
> end quote when you type the initial quote.
>
> It works fine if you are typing the initial quote first and then the text
> contained within the quote.
> i.e. if I wanted to type myCleverFunction("my string")
>
> when I type
>
> myCleverFunction(
>
> script editor would complete the parentheses to give you
>
>myCleverFunction()
>
> with the cursor between the parentheses.
>
> Then when I type an initial quote and I would get
>
> myCleverFunction("")
>
> with my cursor between the quotes so I could type the text in the quotes.
> So
> that works great.
>
> What would drive me nuts was if I had to go back in a line of script after
> it had been typed and add quotes or parentheses around some text already
> there.
>
> If I typed an initial quote I would get this:
>
> ""put in quotes
>
> Instead of what I wanted:
>
> "put in quotes
>
> So I would have to delete one of the quotes then put my cursor at the end
> of
> the string and type the quote and again get this.
>
> "put in quotes""
>
> Again I have to delete one of the quotes.
>
> Then by accident I found how you are actually supposed to do it.
>
> Select the text 'put in quotes' then type the quote and the quotes will be
> put at the beginning and end of the selection.
>
> The same works for open parenthesis '(' and open square bracket '['.
>
> That saves a keystroke and some mousing around to get the second quote
> insertion point over the old way with out the auto complete.
>
> I did a quick search but could not find this in the documentation so
> thought
> I would post that epiphany here.
>
> Happy quoting.
>
> Martin Koob
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from:
> http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Revolution-User-f278306.html
>
> ___
> 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
How I learned to love and use auto quotes & parentheses with LC 9 DP11
Maybe I am the last person to know this but if you don't this may be helpful.
I was getting frustrated with the new feature that automatically puts the
end quote when you type the initial quote.
It works fine if you are typing the initial quote first and then the text
contained within the quote.
i.e. if I wanted to type myCleverFunction("my string")
when I type
myCleverFunction(
script editor would complete the parentheses to give you
myCleverFunction()
with the cursor between the parentheses.
Then when I type an initial quote and I would get
myCleverFunction("")
with my cursor between the quotes so I could type the text in the quotes. So
that works great.
What would drive me nuts was if I had to go back in a line of script after
it had been typed and add quotes or parentheses around some text already
there.
If I typed an initial quote I would get this:
""put in quotes
Instead of what I wanted:
"put in quotes
So I would have to delete one of the quotes then put my cursor at the end of
the string and type the quote and again get this.
"put in quotes""
Again I have to delete one of the quotes.
Then by accident I found how you are actually supposed to do it.
Select the text 'put in quotes' then type the quote and the quotes will be
put at the beginning and end of the selection.
The same works for open parenthesis '(' and open square bracket '['.
That saves a keystroke and some mousing around to get the second quote
insertion point over the old way with out the auto complete.
I did a quick search but could not find this in the documentation so thought
I would post that epiphany here.
Happy quoting.
Martin Koob
--
Sent from:
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Revolution-User-f278306.html
___
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
