On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 6:23 PM Bob Sneidar via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> Hmmm… Isn’t Levure almost completely based on script only stacks?
You can use binary or script only stacks with Levure. It doesn’t care one
way or the other. It’s just reading in stack files y
I chose the more likely of the two possibilities. :-)
Bob S
On Dec 22, 2020, at 9:38 PM, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode
mailto:use-livecode@lists.runrev.com>> wrote:
Rather, I didn't mean the team invented script-only stacks for Trevor in
particular, but rather than they moved to git and nee
Rather, I didn't mean the team invented script-only stacks for Trevor in
particular, but rather than they moved to git and needed text files.
English is such a positional language.
--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
On Decembe
Trevor uses git, which is why script-only stacks were invented. The LC team
uses git too.
--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
On December 22, 2020 6:24:22 PM Bob Sneidar via use-livecode
wrote:
Hmmm… Isn’t Levure almost com
Hmmm… Isn’t Levure almost completely based on script only stacks?
Bob S
> On Dec 22, 2020, at 4:09 PM, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> Unless you specifically need text files for git or some other reason, you
> don't really need script-only stacks. Put the script in a button an
Unless you specifically need text files for git or some other reason, you
don't really need script-only stacks. Put the script in a button and then
put it in use or use it as a backscript. It will be encrypted when the
stack is. Another advantage to keeping scripts in the stack is that they
wor
Bob:
> The promise of creating standalones and encrypted stacks
> containing code sounds promising, but there are caveats.
Just like anything else - you have to learn the ropes. First time at any
task can present some challenges. For those in the habit of encrypting
stacks, it comes more nat
On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 3:23 PM Bob Sneidar via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> What he said. The promise of creating standalones and encrypted stacks
> containing code sounds promising, but there are caveats. It begs the
> question, how do we encrypt script only stacks or l
What he said. The promise of creating standalones and encrypted stacks
containing code sounds promising, but there are caveats. It begs the question,
how do we encrypt script only stacks or libraries? I don’t use encrypted stacks
because my code is for internal use only, but if I ever went comme
Thanks everyone for your suggestions and help. I _guess_ I see the problem as
creating fields inside an encrypted stack and referencing them to set
properties, etc. So the new plan is to have an unencrypted stack in which I
build the tree and connectors using code from the encrypted stack. This
Mark Waddingham wrote:
On 12/13/20 6:02 PM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote:
>>
>> Copying objects is disallowed in an encrypted stack, since of course
>> once an object is copied it could be pasted into an unencrypted
>> stack, and thus expose the source.
>
> Its not the copy that will be
On 2020-12-14 06:03, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode wrote:
On 12/13/20 6:02 PM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote:
Copying objects is disallowed in an encrypted stack, since of course
once an object is copied it could be pasted into an unencrypted stack,
and thus expose the source.
Exce
On 12/13/20 6:02 PM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote:
Copying objects is disallowed in an encrypted stack, since of course once an object is copied
it could be pasted into an unencrypted stack, and thus expose the source.
Except, copying via script using "copy x to y" doesn't involve the
Hi Ron,
About ‘it’ — is that supposed to be the name of the new field or something
else? You can always use “last” to refer to a new control, “the last field” is
“any object whose number property is equal to the number of objects of that
type." ‘It’ might have been changed to something else in
Ron Noice wrote:
? My program (built with LC 9.6.1 Indy Windows) contains a large number
> of references to fields by variables.
...
> only when I encrypt it does it fight back. Here's a simplified example
> of what I'm doing:
>
> create group "grpTree"
> ...
> copy fld "baseBox" to grp "grpTree"
My program (built with LC 9.6.1 Indy Windows) contains a large number of
references to fields by variables. For example, instead of refering to [fld
"abc"] I refer to [fld tName] where tName is a variable containing "abc" (no
quotes).
This has worked perfectly until I *encrypted* the stack (thr
16 matches
Mail list logo
