Thanks for all the ideas, guys. I seem to get the most consistent results if I sort by the
short ID of each card and then follow that with the sort for category or title. Because the
data was imported from a text file, the original order is the order of the card IDs.
What threw me originally
Hey guys, while this is interesting to know and think about . i solved
my problem by not needing to set the script.
Thanks for taking time
On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 4:54 PM Ralph DiMola via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> I thought for a standalone if you "set the
I thought for a standalone if you "set the passKey of stack "x" to "y" you
will be able to modify scripts. This will only be in ram. If your standalone
saves the stack then do "set the password of stack to "y" before saving. If
someone is scraping ram memory then you have a problem, but if someone
tom trilled,
> On the flip side, as soon as I want to set the script of a button, I'm
> doomed to have my code remain readable. I gotta think of a workaround for
> why I was setting the script to begin with.
Now I’m wondering . . . can you set the behavior of the object in the protected
stack
If you’re working on the original stack and not a duplicate, I suppose you
could always kill -9 Livecode before it saves . . .
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
HmmmI hear you, that makes sense.
On the flip side, as soon as I want to set the script of a button, I'm
doomed to have my code remain readable. I gotta think of a workaround for
why I was setting the script to begin with.
Thanks MIke.
On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 2:43 PM Mike Kerner via
Actually, I like Jackie’s idea better.
Make an array for each of the parameters to be sorted on. Then sort each of the
arrays. You can access each card in the sorted order by referring to the card
ID in the sorted array.
Or you could put each card identifier in a text line with commas between
It might be less work to just implement your own sorting code. I’ve found them
pretty easy to implement. A bubble sort is very simple, but inefficient for a
large number of items to sort. If you have a lot of cards, you would want to
use a more efficient algorithm. Check out the link below if
On 30/12/2021 19:38, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode wrote:
Thanks for the reply. I understand how it works, my question is how to
make it not work that way. :) Basically, I don't want the sub-sort.
The 'sub-sort' will only have any effect if there are cards with
identical values for the
sez J. Landman Gay:> I am converting an old stack to LC and it needs to sort
cards by one of two fields. LC does
> stable sorts, so if I sort by field 1 it works, and then if I sort later by
>field 2 it retains
> the original sort and does a sub-sort. I don't want that. What's the best way
Has anyone messed with using the content-available dictionary key with APNS
to cause your app to wake up and process your payload?
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
Behold the new keyword undoSort
> On Dec 30, 2021, at 12:19 PM, doc hawk via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
>
> jacqui jagged,
>
>> What's the best way to ignore the previous sort order?
>
> I think what you’re looking at here isn’t even livecode itself.
>
> Just about any computer sort doesn’t
jacqui jagged,
>What's the best way to ignore the previous sort order?
I think what you’re looking at here isn’t even livecode itself.
Just about any computer sort doesn’t change the order of two objects that “tie”
during a sort—whichever was first, remains first.
I think you’re going to
You're supposed to put a piece of cardboard over the right side of the screen when viewing
YouTube. Solves everything.
It was funny, when I watched the video the first time my reaction was "huh??" And then I
remembered the title and everything clicked into place and I thought it was
I would hope that would be the behavior. It would also make it harder for
your stack to get borked by someone else.
If I was trying to break that behavior I would try to put the code into a
variable, encrypt the variable using the password, then set the script of
the object to the encrypted
Thanks for the reply. I understand how it works, my question is how to make it not work that
way. :) Basically, I don't want the sub-sort.
On the other hand, something may have gone wrong when sorting by the first field because the
order didn't change at all -- it was like I never executed the
Hi Folks,
Today I found out that if I put a password on my stack, any code that sets
the script of an object in that stack receives an execution error when
running as standalone.
Why is this so?
And is there a workaround?
Thanks,
--
Tom Glod
Founder & Developer
MakeShyft R.D.A
You shouldn't need to ignore the previous sort. The second sort
over-rides the first; it's only when looking at those cards which have
the same value for the second field that the previous sorting applies.
So if we have
A2 B1 A1 C3
If we sort by char 2 of each, we would get B1 A1 A2 C3
a software developer walks into a bar and orders a list.
Martin
> On Dec 29, 2021, at 4:54 PM, Mark Smith via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> Oh Jacque, it may have been short but then there was the tantalizing link to
> Ray Dalio’s Last Warning: “Most People have no idea what’s coming”. And
Ho ho - whoa - only one week to go?
Yep, I'm honoring all 12 days of Christmas
with a WordLib 2.3 Coupon for 30% Off.
But we're already at the half-way point;
after January 5, this deal is history.
So get it while it's ... cold.
And may your New Year be ... bold.
Q: Can I use PayPal?
A:
20 matches
Mail list logo
