Re: Behaviors and the message path

>> Mark wrote: >> So... Either I'm not crazy or I've got company. > > Bob wrote: > 2 other options. Neither of you is crazy. Both of you are crazy. These are not 'other' options!? Both cases are already included in the listing of Mark. Or is it a typo, did you mean "2 other options:"?

Re: Behaviors and the message path

2 other options. Neither of you is crazy. Both of you are crazy. What do they teach children in logic classes these days?? ;-) Bob S On Dec 9, 2016, at 18:25 , Mark Wieder > wrote: I think of them as private backscripts, available only the

Re: Behaviors and the message path

Thanks for taking the time to explain this Mark. After I thought about it for awhile I expected that this would be your answer and again I’m very pleased with how you’ve implemented the behavior feature. Tim Bleiler, Ph.D. Instructional Designer, HSIT University at Buffalo > On Dec 12, 2016,

Re: Behaviors and the message path

On 2016-12-09 19:44, Bleiler, Timothy wrote: I still have one question though. Given the part of your answer I quoted above, why does the “pass” control structure trigger handlers along the behavior chain rather than skipping over them and going to the next object in the ownership chain?

Re: Behaviors and the message path

Actually I got the idea from you. But so far it seems to hold. Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com On December 9, 2016 8:27:18 PM Mark Wieder wrote: On 12/09/2016 03:15 PM, J.

Re: Behaviors and the message path

On 12/09/2016 03:15 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: On 12/9/16 4:47 PM, mwieder wrote: But at any rate, I believe conflating "extending" a script with "concatenation" is the wrong way to think about behaviors. I think of them as private backscripts, available only the object to which they are

Re: Behaviors and the message path

On 12/9/16 4:47 PM, mwieder wrote: But at any rate, I believe conflating "extending" a script with "concatenation" is the wrong way to think about behaviors. I think of them as private backscripts, available only the object to which they are attached. If the behavior doesn't catch a messages,

Re: Behaviors and the message path

--- -- Mark Wieder ahsoftw...@gmail.com -- View this message in context: http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Behaviors-and-the-message-path-tp4710941p4710975.html Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ use-livec

RE: Behaviors and the message path

mailto:use-livecode-boun...@lists.runrev.com] On Behalf Of J. Landman Gay Sent: Friday, December 09, 2016 3:22 PM To: How to use LiveCode Subject: Re: Behaviors and the message path On 12/9/16 1:49 PM, mwieder wrote: > ...and I want to echo your appreciation of Mr. Waddingham's > stewards

Re: Behaviors and the message path

> On Dec 9, 2016, at 2:44 PM, mwieder wrote: > > I think it's wrong to consider behavior scripts as concatenated onto the end > of a script. If you rather think of the behavior script as a library or > backscript, then the message path becomes a little clearer. Thinking

Re: Behaviors and the message path

On 12/9/16 1:49 PM, mwieder wrote: ...and I want to echo your appreciation of Mr. Waddingham's stewardship of the xtalk legacy. I have argued (and will continue to do so) with him about fine points of interpretation and future direction of the language, but I always appreciate his constant

Re: Behaviors and the message path

and his overview of how modifications might affect the entire ecosystem. - -- Mark Wieder ahsoftw...@gmail.com -- View this message in context: http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Behaviors-and-the-message-path-tp4710941p4710969.html Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list

Re: Behaviors and the message path

uot;. - -- Mark Wieder ahsoftw...@gmail.com -- View this message in context: http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Behaviors-and-the-message-path-tp4710941p4710968.html Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _

Re: Behaviors and the message path

On Dec 9, 2016, at 12:56 PM, Mark Waddingham > wrote: Rule (2) preserves this semantic for behaviors and, indeed, codifies the fact that behaviors aren't really objects - they are script extensions (for want of a better term). Thank you Mark, your

Re: Behaviors and the message path

On 2016-12-08 21:23, Bleiler, Timothy wrote: I’m curious about what appears to me to be a confusing aspect of the implementation of behaviors. In short, behaviors have characteristics of an isolated, local extension of the message path AND characteristics of a concatenation of the parent

Re: Behaviors and the message path

will result in an answer dialog with “You are in Script 3” as the prompt. This is consistent with the traditional Livecode control based message path. Alternatively, if the behavior of Button A is set to a button with script 3 and you think that behaviors are a private message path as Mark described, you w

Re: Behaviors and the message path

On 12/08/2016 04:40 PM, Bleiler, Timothy wrote: Thanks Mark. I probably shouldn’t have used the word “problems” anywhere in my post. I agree, there are terrific benefits with the current implementation of the behavior feature. My main concern was insuring that what I observed was intended. If

Re: Behaviors and the message path

I think I need an example, because I'm not understanding the problem that you're having with the currentbehavior On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 7:40 PM, Bleiler, Timothy wrote: > > On Dec 8, 2016, at 5:09 PM, mwieder wrote: > > > > I don't see these as

Re: Behaviors and the message path

> On Dec 8, 2016, at 5:09 PM, mwieder wrote: > > I don't see these as anomalies or inconsistencies, but as features that help > implement proper object-oriented behavior. Tim- what "problems" do you see > with the way this is implemented? Am I missing something? Thanks

RE: Behaviors and the message path

/Behaviors-and-the-message-path-tp4710941p4710943.html Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription p

RE: Behaviors and the message path

Timothy Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2016 3:24 PM To: How to use LiveCode Subject: Behaviors and the message path I’m curious about what appears to me to be a confusing aspect of the implementation of behaviors. In short, behaviors have characteristics of an isolated, local extension of the

Behaviors and the message path

I’m curious about what appears to me to be a confusing aspect of the implementation of behaviors. In short, behaviors have characteristics of an isolated, local extension of the message path AND characteristics of a concatenation of the parent control’s script. I’m raising the issue for two