Re: Is HTML5 really practical?

[hh via use-livecode]

> Is there a way to force a reload of the bit you want (need) to reload,
> without reloading the engine ?

A reload doesn't reload the engine at any rate. To the contrary, it usually
just resets the standalone if the engine is (also on server) identical.

So reloading a standalone or loading another standalone with the identical
engine depends upon the caching policy of your browser and of your server
(my server hyperhh.de uses SSD and keeps the engine in RAM for a while).

For example my 9.5.0 standalones reloaded (or loading another standalone
with the same engine) with Safari (of MacOS 10.14.6) or a browser widget
(LC 9.5.0) on Mac mini 2.5 GHz and a 100 MBit connection need

< 3 seconds from hyperhh.de
< 5 seconds from hh.on-rev.com

Chrome on Mac needs at about 2-4 seconds more.
Firefox on Mac does each time a 'full' reload.

___
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: Is HTML5 really practical?

[Alex Tweedly via use-livecode]

On 31/08/2019 14:52, Pi Digital via use-livecode wrote:
I absolutely agree with everything else Hermann states though. You 
must set up your server to speed up download. But if you reload the 
page manually you are effectively forcing it to ignore the cache and 
download everything again. If you navigate away and comeback though it 
does not need to redownload. 


Is there a way to force a reload of the bit you want (need) to reload, 
without reloading the engine ?


Alex.


___
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: Launch vs Set in widget

[J. Landman Gay via use-livecode]

Yes, I meant "launch url in widget" which says it opens a url in the 
widget, but that is what "set the URL of widget x" does too. I don't see 
any difference.


I'm having a terrible time with both acceleratedRendering and the browser 
widget in LC 9.5. I can't fix acceleratedRendering but I think I'll try 
going back to the original mobileCreate method and see if that works 
better. On my Pixel the widget freezes and Android puts up its "not 
responding" error dialog after the user navigates around a few pages. It 
doesn't behave correctly when changing stacks and remains visible after the 
new stack opens, obscuring the card. It also freezes when the back history 
is exhausted. I was curious if setting the URL with its launch command 
would be different.


I badly need to be able to respond to the backKey too, but apparently 
that's not possible. The widget eats it. As for acceleratedRendering, it's 
broken. I had to turn it off completely.


I'm stuck with 9.5 because I have to build for 64-bit.

--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
On August 31, 2019 3:58:43 PM Pi Digital via use-livecode 
 wrote:


Launch url is for opening an appropriate app for the url (text file, 
LiveCode stack, phone number etc) as associated by your OS. A phone number 
might open your phone app on a mobile device. A text doc might open MS Word.


Launch in widget is intended to open a webpage in the browser. Depending 
what widget you send it to of course.


Sean Cole
Pi Digital Prod Ltd

On 31 Aug 2019, at 21:35, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode 
 wrote:


What is the difference between "launch URL" and "set the URL" in a browser 
widget?


--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

___
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: Hactoberfest is coming...

[Pi Digital via use-livecode]

Good work, thanks Mikey. 

Sean Cole
Pi Digital Prod Ltd

> On 31 Aug 2019, at 22:27, Mike Kerner via use-livecode 
>  wrote:
> 
> OK, Mikey's 100% unofficial livecode hacktoberfest idea exchange repo is
> now live.
> https://macmikey.github.io/lc-hacktoberfest/
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 11:22 PM Brian Milby via use-livecode <
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> 
>> Yes, very good idea.  I got my first shirt last year.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Brian
>> On Aug 30, 2019, 11:05 PM -0400, Mikey via use-livecode <
>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com>, wrote:
>>> Hactoberfest is a month away. That's github's event that awards some swag
>>> like tshirts and stickers in exchange for pull requests to open source
>>> repos. Last year to get your swag you had to submit 4 PR's.
>>> We've got a month, so maybe now would be a good time to develop a list of
>>> LC repos that deserve our time, changes/additions/features we want to
>>> implement, and get a bunch of people into the swing of contributing to
>>> these LC projects.
>>> We also need to help the people who have never done this help themselves.
>>> ___
>>> 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
___
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: Hactoberfest is coming...

[Mike Kerner via use-livecode]

OK, Mikey's 100% unofficial livecode hacktoberfest idea exchange repo is
now live.
https://macmikey.github.io/lc-hacktoberfest/



On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 11:22 PM Brian Milby via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:

> Yes, very good idea.  I got my first shirt last year.
>
> Thanks,
> Brian
> On Aug 30, 2019, 11:05 PM -0400, Mikey via use-livecode <
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com>, wrote:
> > Hactoberfest is a month away. That's github's event that awards some swag
> > like tshirts and stickers in exchange for pull requests to open source
> > repos. Last year to get your swag you had to submit 4 PR's.
> > We've got a month, so maybe now would be a good time to develop a list of
> > LC repos that deserve our time, changes/additions/features we want to
> > implement, and get a bunch of people into the swing of contributing to
> > these LC projects.
> > We also need to help the people who have never done this help themselves.
> > ___
> > 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: Launch vs Set in widget

[Pi Digital via use-livecode]

Launch url is for opening an appropriate app for the url (text file, LiveCode 
stack, phone number etc) as associated by your OS. A phone number might open 
your phone app on a mobile device. A text doc might open MS Word. 

Launch in widget is intended to open a webpage in the browser. Depending what 
widget you send it to of course. 

Sean Cole
Pi Digital Prod Ltd

> On 31 Aug 2019, at 21:35, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode 
>  wrote:
> 
> What is the difference between "launch URL" and "set the URL" in a browser 
> widget?
> 
> -- 
> Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
> HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
> 
> ___
> 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: Launch vs Set in widget

[hh via use-livecode]

> JLG wrote:
> What is the difference between "launch URL" and "set the URL" in a 
> browser widget?

You probably mean load url which caches non-blocking,
contrary to set url.

There is also load url in widget which also sends you a message,
contrary to set url.

Launch url leaves LC and launches the url in the system's default
browser.


___
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: Is HTML5 really practical?

[Pi Digital via use-livecode]

I would mainly only use HTML5 deployment for Web Apps rather than web pages. 
Much better to use some pre-made web template, Wordpress or learn and use 
native HTML5 & CSS3.

I’m converting for my client two of his commercial desktop apps being used by 
sales agents over to Web Apps as he is looking to expand his app product line 
and his customer IT depts are unwilling to install any more applications. Web 
Apps open up the market for him to 30 times as many customers which is a really 
big deal. The only initial hurdle was getting it to talk through php to the 
MySQL server but ended up being easy in comparison to simple text field 
operations and now form view DataGridV2 (bane of my life at the moment). 

Btw, on a tangent, I’ve had good experiences with HTML5 deployment running in 
Safari on an iOS device with only a few niggles like spacebar and tab not 
working. Emscripten say it’s not supported but that doesn’t mean you can’t get 
it to work. 

Sean

___
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

Launch vs Set in widget

[J. Landman Gay via use-livecode]

What is the difference between "launch URL" and "set the URL" in a 
browser widget?


--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

___
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: Is HTML5 really practical?

[Rick Harrison via use-livecode]

Hi hh,

I’m glad you are happy, and have found LC HTML5 useful
for what you are doing.

For my needs it was not up to the task, or simply just not
the correct tool for the job.

I can see how it can be good for small quick programs
for learning examples, and I’m glad it works for you.

Sorry, I do not have the luxury of spending my time
trying to recreate any of your more advanced examples.
I’m just glad that you have shared those examples with
the community so we can all learn from them.

I think Richard Gaskin did a good job of explaining the
strengths of both approaches.

Cheers,

Rick



> On Aug 31, 2019, at 11:29 AM, hh via use-livecode 
>  wrote:
> 
> I have made with nearly every progress in the standalone engine in
> sum 69 examples. Most of them are simple. Some of them show things
> that are not available by other web tools.
> 
> So take one of the more advanced examples and show me how to make that
> with the tools you cited. I'm looking forward. I didn't need more than
> a few hours for most of these examples.
> 
> TMHO, the HTML5 standalone builder is an appropriate tool for creating
> learning software. Of course you can, if you like headache, use a lot
> of huge and inscrutable javascript packages (increases also the loading
> time).
> 
> But if you are clever and use the best of both sides (LiveCode in the
> standalone and HTML5 in the page) then you can create apps that you
> can't have in LC or HTML alone: 'synergetic effects' are possible.

___
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: Is HTML5 really practical?

[Rick Harrison via use-livecode]

Hi Bill,

You probably should have led with the fact that you are a Wordpress person.
LC supposedly plays nicely with Wordpress.  Maybe someone can point him
to the Wordpress videos/resources from a couple years ago?  (Is it a
Wordpress plug-in or what?  I don’t remember.)

LC Server is much nicer to work with than PHP as your middleware choice
between HTML and any database work.  You can mix your code however
you need to along with Javascript too.

I get that you are retired and basically want to slap together a useful
website as soon as possible so Wordpress does pretty much most
of what you commonly want to accomplish.

I like Valentina Studio (FREE) for putting a database together.

https://www.valentina-db.com/en/get-free-valentina-studio 


It works well on macOS, Linux, or Windows computers.

Good luck,

Rick



> On Aug 31, 2019, at 10:14 AM, William Prothero via use-livecode 
>  wrote:
> 
> Folks,
> Thanks for your thoughts on LC HTML5 for web pages. I use LC increasingly 
> only for my own projects, even though I own a commercial license. I’m retired 
> and give away any education applications that I create. For simple web page 
> projects, though, I start with WordPress. There is a lot of really nice 
> instructional material for making WordPress plugins (php). With Wordpress 
> doing a lot of the basic heavy lifting, doing a special plugin for a custom 
> need in php is pretty straightforward.
> 
> BTW, Herman’s work with LC Html5 and javascript is really a nice 
> contribution. 
> 
> Best,
> Bill
> 
> William A. Prothero
> http://earthlearningsolutions.org
> 
> 
> ___
> 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: Is HTML5 really practical?

[JJS via use-livecode]

I always like it when you give these well thought replies, Richard.

Opposed to me, i flap some things out sometimes too quick.


Op 31-8-2019 om 19:19 schreef Richard Gaskin via use-livecode:

William Prothero wrote:

> ...I’m wondering whether it might be easier and better to just use
> the engine as a cgi and do everything in css and html.

Yes.

On the sever, LC makes as good a choice for CGIs as nearly anything else.

On the client there are many options, including browser-native HTML, 
LC's emscripten export to JS/HTML, or an LC native app.


Considering how simple and lightweight web forms are, esp. with CSS3's 
features for field labels and prompts vs having to script all of that 
by hand in LC, for things like that the choice clearly favors simplicity.


Then consider the browser compatibility constraints of LC's current 
export, and that mobile isn't considered supported at all, and the 
choice becomes even clearer.


LC's HTML export can be useful for certain kinds of highly vertical 
solutions, esp. those with little to no direct business competition. 
But as others here have noted, it's not designed for making most kinds 
of web pages.


It's easy to look at desktop and browser apps as being similar, but 
the more you work in both the clearer it becomes that they are 
radically different paradigms.


Native apps, whether made with LC, XCode, VB, or anything else, are 
based on static coordinates, while web elements automatically reflow. 
Right off the bat all aspects of handling layout and changes to layout 
are different at a very fundamental level.


Think about the implications of that for a while, then consider all 
the ways LC is designed to talk to OS APIs, and how browsers are 
designed to insulate the user's OS from what happens within web pages, 
and the stark differences between the two become soberly clear.


--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
 
 ambassa...@fourthworld.com http://www.FourthWorld.com

___
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: Is HTML5 really practical?

[Richard Gaskin via use-livecode]

William Prothero wrote:

> ...I’m wondering whether it might be easier and better to just use
> the engine as a cgi and do everything in css and html.

Yes.

On the sever, LC makes as good a choice for CGIs as nearly anything else.

On the client there are many options, including browser-native HTML, 
LC's emscripten export to JS/HTML, or an LC native app.


Considering how simple and lightweight web forms are, esp. with CSS3's 
features for field labels and prompts vs having to script all of that by 
hand in LC, for things like that the choice clearly favors simplicity.


Then consider the browser compatibility constraints of LC's current 
export, and that mobile isn't considered supported at all, and the 
choice becomes even clearer.


LC's HTML export can be useful for certain kinds of highly vertical 
solutions, esp. those with little to no direct business competition. 
But as others here have noted, it's not designed for making most kinds 
of web pages.


It's easy to look at desktop and browser apps as being similar, but the 
more you work in both the clearer it becomes that they are radically 
different paradigms.


Native apps, whether made with LC, XCode, VB, or anything else, are 
based on static coordinates, while web elements automatically reflow. 
Right off the bat all aspects of handling layout and changes to layout 
are different at a very fundamental level.


Think about the implications of that for a while, then consider all the 
ways LC is designed to talk to OS APIs, and how browsers are designed to 
insulate the user's OS from what happens within web pages, and the stark 
differences between the two become soberly clear.


--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
 
 ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com

___
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: Is HTML5 really practical?

[hh via use-livecode]

> Rick H. wrote:
> LC HTML5 engine in my opinion isn’t practical for many of the
> reasons other’s have stated...
> ... What does work for making websites/webpages is:
> Apache 2.x, LC Server, databases such as PostgreSQL, 
> non-LC HTML5, and CSS.

I have made with nearly every progress in the standalone engine in
sum 69 examples. Most of them are simple. Some of them show things
that are not available by other web tools.

So take one of the more advanced examples and show me how to make that
with the tools you cited. I'm looking forward. I didn't need more than
a few hours for most of these examples.

TMHO, the HTML5 standalone builder is an appropriate tool for creating
learning software. Of course you can, if you like headache, use a lot
of huge and inscrutable javascript packages (increases also the loading
time).

But if you are clever and use the best of both sides (LiveCode in the
standalone and HTML5 in the page) then you can create apps that you
can't have in LC or HTML alone: 'synergetic effects' are possible.
___
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: Is HTML5 really practical?

[William Prothero via use-livecode]

Folks,
Thanks for your thoughts on LC HTML5 for web pages. I use LC increasingly only 
for my own projects, even though I own a commercial license. I’m retired and 
give away any education applications that I create. For simple web page 
projects, though, I start with WordPress. There is a lot of really nice 
instructional material for making WordPress plugins (php). With Wordpress doing 
a lot of the basic heavy lifting, doing a special plugin for a custom need in 
php is pretty straightforward.

BTW, Herman’s work with LC Html5 and javascript is really a nice contribution. 

Best,
Bill

William A. Prothero
http://earthlearningsolutions.org


___
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: Is HTML5 really practical?

[Rick Harrison via use-livecode]

Hi Bill,

LC HTML5 engine in my opinion isn’t practical for many of the
reasons other’s have stated.  It wasn’t created with the idea
that it was going to help you to create webpages. (That was
what I originally thought it would be used for, so you are not
alone in making that assumption.)  

It was created to help you to run a stack within a web-browser,
and so it has to download the engine to the web-browser
before it can perform any function. It’s functioning was
incomplete in some ways so it was “Experimental” for a
long time, and not a finely polished finished product.
It may still have some issues.

I felt that if one has to take the time to download
something, then one should probably just download
the appropriate app for the correct operating system
whether that is macOS, Windows, or Linux.  It’s not
like users don’t know how to do that by clicking on
a weblink. There isn’t any question about how much
functionality one is getting with an LC app then either.

What does work for making websites/webpages is:
Apache 2.x, LC Server, databases such as PostgreSQL, 
non-LC HTML5, and CSS.  I recommend PostgreSQL
as it’s license is an MIT license that is “Free as in water”,
and my be used for any purpose, commercial or
non-commercial.  One also does not have to post
one’s source code for PostgreSQL anywhere either.
(Other databases use some other form of GPL that
isn’t so nice or may require a subscription payment
of $500 per year.)

I hope this helps you with your decision making.

Good luck!

Rick






> On Aug 30, 2019, at 4:42 PM, William Prothero via use-livecode 
>  wrote:
> 
> Folks:
> I’m considering making a web site that will use livecode’s html5 engine. Is 
> this practical? 
> 
> What I want to create is a signup system for a kayaking club. Paddles are 
> scheduled for each week and members enter their names for various paddle 
> times. The member list would be in a database and there would also be a 
> membership page with entries for various aspects of their skill levels.
> 
> HH’s demos see to show reasonable engine load times, but I’m wondering 
> whether it might be easier and better to just use the engine as a cgi and do 
> everything in css and html.
> 
> Frankly, I haven’t seen any compelling use case for livecode's html5. Is 
> there one, at this time?
> 
> Any thoughts?
> 
> Best,
> Bill
> 
> William A. Prothero
> http://earthlearningsolutions.org
> 
> ___
> 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: Is HTML5 really practical?

[Pi Digital via use-livecode]

> On 31 Aug 2019, at 10:01, hh via use-livecode  
> wrote:
> 
> The HTML5 deployment has its own problems. The biggest problem is
> that people use it for free and are not willing to buy (at least
> for a short period) the HTML5 license in order to support further
> LC development in that field (but then moan about missing features).
> 
> So, also from that reason, HTML5 deployment is still very uncomplete.

Me and my client bought a 2 year license each plus I had my 6mth from the 
crowdfund reward. Does that qualify me to ‘moan about missing features’?

I absolutely agree with everything else Hermann states though. You must set up 
your server to speed up download. But if you reload the page manually you are 
effectively forcing it to ignore the cache and download everything again. If 
you navigate away and comeback though it does not need to redownload. 

There is a huge amount of things that are broken at the moment. A lot of that 
it seems is because Chrome updated but LC haven’t yet met up with the new 
conditions. I’ve been looking into it but have been a bit tied up with my 
clients project so I’ve just been using workarounds for now. It’s a necessary 
evil ‘til we get LC HTML5 deployment fixed (along with some other basic LC 
anomalies). 

I’d recommend to keep playing with it. I’ve accomplished so much for my client 
with it despite all the issues. Perseverance. And ask the community. And post 
bug reports. 

Sean




___
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: Checking the host OS

[Mark Waddingham via use-livecode]

On 2019-08-31 04:41, Devin Asay via use-livecode wrote:

No, I’m just toying with the idea of having a 32-bit launcher that
would examine the host OS, then launch the proper executable based on
whether it is 32 or 64 bit. Sort of like a poor man’s universal app
like we used to create for MacOS. It’s possible I’m use way
overthinking this.


I think you might be overthinking this...

The Windows world is different from mac because the former don't have 
the

idea of multi-architecture binaries.

Obviously on mac this isn't something you have to worry about - 
especially
since versions of macOS going back many years have supported 64-bit as 
have

the machines it runs on.

On Windows it is usual for the user to choose whether they want 32-bit 
or
64-bit versions of the apps they download and install. This is usually 
guided
by the webpages which offer downloads as you can usually assume that if 
the user
is on a 64-bit windows machine, then the browser they are running will 
be 64-bit
which means that you can tell from the UserAgent string what 
architecture their

machine has and so you can guide the user to the right choice.

In an end-user setting, you could always have a dialog which pops up 
when running
the 32-bit version on a 64-bit machine (by using Dar's suggestion) on 
first run
to suggest the user might want to download the 64-bit version - however, 
you then
have to ask yourself whether your app actually benefits from being 
64-bit enough

to justify this extra complexity.

In an organizational setting then one would hope that the IT department 
would
know what to do when presented with the choice of both a 32-bit and a 
64-bit

build of a Windows app... In reality this may or may not be the case ;)

So my suggestion (in general - obviously specific circumstances always 
apply) is
don't worry about it. Offer two downloads explicitly named and marked - 
one as
32-bit one as 64-bit and then, if you can, guide the user to the right 
choice
online by offering the appropriate build (which Chrome does, for 
example, adding
further weight to being able to rely on the bitness of the browser 
accessing your

download site).

Warmest Regards,

Mark.

--
Mark Waddingham ~ m...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/
LiveCode: Everyone can create apps

___
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: Native HTML5 field

[hh via use-livecode]

Just uploaded the source code to "Sample Stacks":

[1] HTML5 Multi Windows (Focus-Move-Resize) v110
[2] HTML5 GoStackURL v100
[3] HTML5 Native Field v106

or use

http://livecodeshare.runrev.com/stack/945/ ... for [1]
http://livecodeshare.runrev.com/stack/947/ ... for [2]
http://livecodeshare.runrev.com/stack/948/ ... for [3]

Stack [2] needs a local server and your stacks (which should
work with HTML5) in a folder to load with go stack URL from
the standalone (uses same origin policy).

** Stacks [1] and [3] are ready for compiling. Just download
and hit button "TEST" from the LC 9.5.0 or 9.0.5 toolbar. **

For an example of [3] that uses webfonts from its server use

http://hyperhh.de/html5/HTML5Field_v106-9.5.0X.html (EU)
http://hh.on-rev.com/html5/HTML5Field_v106-9.5.0X.html (US)

For more examples in HTML5 I wait first for some progress of
LC in that field. 

___
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: Is HTML5 really practical?

[hh via use-livecode]

The HTML5 deployment has its own problems. The biggest problem is
that people use it for free and are not willing to buy (at least
for a short period) the HTML5 license in order to support further
LC development in that field (but then moan about missing features).

So, also from that reason, HTML5 deployment is still very uncomplete.

Let me answer a few statements from the last posts of this thread.

> we can't do things as simple as put field "MyFld" into aVar

This worked from the first steps of HTML5 deployment. In 9.5.0 make
a new stack with a button and a field and hit button "TEST" from
the LC toolbar.

> even if the dictionary doesn't always tell us what HTML5 can do

With a few exceptions, not that nor what it can't do.

That's why I wrote TestInStandalone. You can there wrote/paste
scripts and look whether 9.5.0-HTML5 can do that (in modern
browsers: latest Safari, Firefox, Chrome. IE/Edge was never
supported).

http://hyperhh.de/html5/hhTestInStandalone-9.5.0hhX.html
http://hh.on-rev.com/html5/hhTestInStandalone-9.5.0hhX.html

On the other hand, when using javascript and native HTML5 objects
you can do things in a LC HTML5 standalone, that LC can't do.
This example has, LC and JS all together, less than 300 lines of
code:

http://hyperhh.de/html5/HTML5Field_v106-9.5.0X.html
http://hh.on-rev.com/html5/HTML5Field_v106-9.5.0X.html

> ... read that if a webpage is not loaded within 3 seconds, 53% of
> visitors will skip it. LC's HTML5 is way too slow. It is stated
> that the engine needs downloading only once but it happens every
> time. It looks like more than 10 sec.

With Safari on a Mac min (2.5 GHz) and a 100 MBit connection I have
the following times with 9.5.0 standalones:

The first time any 9.5.0 standalone loads this needs 5-9 seconds.
The next time any 9.5.0 standalone loads I have it in < 3 seconds.

More than 10 seconds happens only to me when I have three browsers
open, two versions of Livecode open, a local server (MAMP) is
running and VLC is streaming music.

Of course you have to prepare the server for speed, especially such
that each standalone points to the same .js (and the browser
can see that this is the same file and take it from it's cache).

So it is "you make it [reload engine] happen every time" rather than
"it happens every time".


___
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: Checking the host OS

[JB via use-livecode]

Below is some c code that will return the architecture on
OS X.

/*  Determine the machine name, e.g. "x86_64". */

#include 
#include 
#include 
#include 

int main(int argc, const char * argv[]) {
size_t size;
sysctlbyname("hw.machine", NULL, , NULL, 0);  // Get size of data to 
be returned.
char *name = malloc(size);
sysctlbyname("hw.machine", name, , NULL, 0);

// Do stuff...
printf("%s\n", name);
free(name);

return 0;
}


/*
 Output:
 
 x86_64
 Program ended with exit code: 0
*/

Compile the above code and access it with a shell command.

JB


> On Aug 30, 2019, at 8:41 PM, Devin Asay via use-livecode 
>  wrote:
> 
> On Aug 30, 2019, at 9:10 PM, Mark Wieder via use-livecode 
>  wrote:
>> 
>>> On 8/30/19 12:22 PM, Devin Asay via use-livecode wrote:
>>> 
>>> Now that we can build both 32 and 64 bit applications for Windows, it’s 
>>> important to be able to tell whether the host OS is 32 or 64 bit.
>> 
>> Why? If the 64-bit application won't run on the 32-bit system you won't get 
>> as far as your scripted test. Am I missing something?
> 
> No, I’m just toying with the idea of having a 32-bit launcher that would 
> examine the host OS, then launch the proper executable based on whether it is 
> 32 or 64 bit. Sort of like a poor man’s universal app like we used to create 
> for MacOS. It’s possible I’m use way overthinking this. 
> 
> -D
> ___
> 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