On 2015-08-17 06:43, John Dixon wrote:
Fully agreed. Which is why I hope the LC Team continue to focus on
their Commercial Customers and provide them with features that keep
them coming back.
I think I've made it obvious I feel the LC Team should be cut some
slack and Commercial Customers deserv
> The spec is here:
>
> https://github.com/runrev/livecode-ide/blob/develop/Documentation/guides/Extending%20LiveCode.md#documentation-markup
>
> We need to make it easier to find -- I'll see what I can do to make that
> happen.
Oh, thanks
I was looking in https://github.com/runrev/livecode/tr
On 2015-08-17 04:04, Monte Goulding wrote:
On 17 Aug 2015, at 12:46 pm, Kay C Lan
wrote:
I appreciate this is a bit late to the game, and this Doc Team may
already be heading in a certain direction, but I'm wondering if
there's been an thought of adopting some kind of 'Industry Standard'
docse
On 2015-08-17 04:30, Roger Eller wrote:
I am surprised that anyone would expect a lot of coding help to rise
out of
the LC community. Sure there are a few who have experience in the
lower
level languages, but my sole reason in choosing LC was for the
English-like
syntax. I don't know, nor do
> Fully agreed. Which is why I hope the LC Team continue to focus on
> their Commercial Customers and provide them with features that keep
> them coming back.
>
> I think I've made it obvious I feel the LC Team should be cut some
> slack and Commercial Customers deserve a feature set beyond just
Yes, I think most of us old timers are like that. I think the idea was that new
users coming from other languages would get involved though.
On August 16, 2015 10:30:25 PM CDT, Roger Eller
wrote:
>I am surprised that anyone would expect a lot of coding help to rise
>out of
>the LC community.
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Roger Eller
wrote:
> I am surprised that anyone would expect a lot of coding help to rise out of
> the LC community. Sure there are a few who have experience in the lower
> level languages, but my sole reason in choosing LC was for the English-like
> syntax. I d
On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Terence Heaford wrote:
>
> Can you give us your opinion as to why LC was made Open Source?
>
The OP was a Score Card on the KickStarter Objectives not a list of
opinions. Now I admit that English is NOT my strong suit as I barely
passed - 49.5% was rounded up to 50
I am surprised that anyone would expect a lot of coding help to rise out of
the LC community. Sure there are a few who have experience in the lower
level languages, but my sole reason in choosing LC was for the English-like
syntax. I don't know, nor do I want to learn C or Objective C or anything
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 11:04 AM, Monte Goulding
wrote:
>
> It’s a nice easy format that would be simple for LC community members to
> contribute changes. Indeed you could easily do it all on line via GitHub’s
> document editor. Perhaps that was one of the design goals but as long as we
> don’t
> On 17 Aug 2015, at 12:46 pm, Kay C Lan wrote:
>
> I appreciate this is a bit late to the game, and this Doc Team may
> already be heading in a certain direction, but I'm wondering if
> there's been an thought of adopting some kind of 'Industry Standard'
> docset format?
I don’t know the proce
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 1:37 AM, Richmond wrote:
> 3. How come after 15 years with LiveCode I have NEVER heard of
> 'try/catch/throw' ? is this because they are pointless,
> or am I missing something extremely important?
>
Because you're human and you don't sit down late at night and read a
coupl
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 12:04 AM, Richard Gaskin
wrote:
>
>
> We definitely need tagging in the Dictionary, something I'll be pushing for
> as we finally get the ball rolling with the Community Documentation Team soon.
>
> With searchable tags anyone can add terms that will help others find relev
You're right. It was also it increase the user base, which it did
considerably, so that LC would become better known and accepted
generally. As you say, the move to open source was also meant to allow
others to contribute to the engine so that fixes and new features would
be incorporated more q
On Sunday, August 16, 2015, Mark Waddingham wrote:
>
>
> > 2. 12 classes of objects . . . well EPS seems to have gone the way of
> all flesh . .
>
> EPS always relied on a display postscript system which was only ever
> available on some higher end Unix systems way back.
But it sure would nice
In my opinion, it was to give it a chance to grow, by incorporating other
open tech, and also to just KEEP UP with the ever changing tech world
without consuming the inadequate resources of the mother ship.
On Aug 16, 2015 2:46 AM, "Terence Heaford" wrote:
>
> > On 16 Aug 2015, at 07:42, Kay C La
On 16/08/15 20:50, Mark Waddingham wrote:
Thank you very much; useful answers.
Richmond.
1. 'Transcript' . . . not anymore, BUT does the language-qua-language have a
name that is distinct from the IDE?
Well LiveCode is the umbrella... LiveCode IDE and LiveCode Script being what we
use when i
> 1. 'Transcript' . . . not anymore, BUT does the language-qua-language have a
> name that is distinct from the IDE?
Well LiveCode is the umbrella... LiveCode IDE and LiveCode Script being what we
use when it's not clear from context.
> 2. 12 classes of objects . . . well EPS seems to have go
Thanks Peter, I have updated the bug report to ask the question as you
suggested.
With respect, unless revdb is an lc script, it's highly unlikely I would
have the skills to change it.
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 1:29 PM Peter TB Brett
wrote:
> On 2015-08-15 18:30, Peter Haworth wrote:
> > Excellen
So; just back from a computer-Free weekend in the villa; so read the
Revolution 1.1.1. guidebook and coming up with several questions:
1. 'Transcript' . . . not anymore, BUT does the language-qua-language
have a name that is distinct from the IDE?
2. 12 classes of objects . . . well EPS seem
Pending updates to the dictionary, I have a plugin available that lets you
add your own notes to dictionary entries and also tag them with keywords of
your choice. Unfortunately, the details are local to your computer and not
available to other users.
It can be downloaded at http://www.lcsql.com/
William Prothero wrote:
> Richard:
> This is an example of how difficult it can be to find docs on an
> operation that isn’t commonly used and that doesn’t have “obvious”
> syntax.
...
> Perhaps if there was a dictionary based, not on livecode commands,
> but on operations that the user wants to p
Peter TB Brett wrote
> You can actually also do:
>
> send "setState off" to me in 0 seconds
>
> The engine will finish mouseUp, process messages, and then immediately
> run "setState off".
Hi Peter
Thanks. I have changed to 0 seconds.
How messages are processed sent, held and interfe
Monte's reading of the clause is the same as mine (given the trouble that
section of the agreement has given us over the years I keep a close eye on it).
Basically Apple do not want apps to be able to download executable code which
could do anything more than their analysis of the app at submiss
Thanks Alex. I am taking off the week to finish the Calendar App and do
the slides for the Create It with LiveCode course. I will include this
functionality and send it back to the community to use.
Much appreciated,
Todd
>It's at tweedly.org/downloads/icsLib_1_0.zip (contains the library, a
On 2015-08-15 22:53, Martin Koob wrote:
Hi
I found another way to resolve it that works in the sample stack and in
my
application. Reading about the wait command in the dictionary I saw
you can
also use send in time to give LiveCode a chance to process messages.
If I use send in time for bo
26 matches
Mail list logo
