On Jan 28, 2014, at 2:18 AM, Ender Nafi Elekcioglu wrote:
snip
Mark:
I have tens of cards, each one has hundreds of controls
and I create those controls on each time the user navigates to those cards.
Why? When I need to do something like that I will most likely show/hide
groups of
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Richard Gaskin
ambassa...@fourthworld.com wrote:
IDs are 4-byte integers, so the range goes all the way up to 4294967295.
While less urgent than it would be if the range only went to 32768, it's
still something I wouldn't mind seeing addressed at some point.
LiveCode, and the Art of Zen Programming.
Hugh Senior
FLCo
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Mark Wieder mwie...@ahsoftware.net wrote:
That way you don't have to be concerned about the id pool, as nothing is
being created or destroyed.
___
Or, as Lavoisier put it in 1780 (obviously an early adopter):
Nothing is lost, nothing is created, everything is changed
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Graham
On 28 Jan 2014, at 11:10, FlexibleLearning.com ad...@flexiblelearning.com
wrote:
LiveCode, and the Art of Zen Programming.
Hugh Senior
Since, there isn’t any native command to do this;
I created a new stack and copied my cards to it.
It resulted two things:
1. My background group has completely gone crazy.
Now the group itself is *shared* and *background*, but its controls are not.
Interesting, isn’t it?
I have a field
Alan hi,
About second part of your reply: no, I don’t use any stack as a datafile.
For that purpose, I’m using a couple of simple text files and a big SQLite
database.
The app has a library substack which is static and don’t alter during runtime;
the mainstack has 23 cards which have several
Hi, Ender. The ID's will still increase as the app runs - same as in
the development environment, but when the app is restarted, the original
stack will be loaded and the ID's will start again from their original
values.
On 27/01/2014 13:18, Ender Nafi Elekcioglu wrote:
Alan hi,
About
No one ever quits Ender's apps (they are just too good) so he still has a
problem :)
On 28 Jan 2014, at 12:33 am, John Craig j...@splash21.com wrote:
Hi, Ender. The ID's will still increase as the app runs - same as in the
development environment, but when the app is restarted, the
Ender Nafi wrote:
I have an app which is been developed for a very long time.
Many controls; including buttons, field, images, etc,; have been added and
deleted countless times.
Thus, the id’s of objects are now in 6 figures: 107620.
It worries me somehow; because of int16 thing.
You know, no
: Mon, Jan 27, 2014 9:59 am
Subject: Re: How to Reset ID's of Controls
Ender Nafi wrote:
I have an app which is been developed for a very long time.
Many controls; including buttons, field, images, etc,; have been added and
deleted countless times.
Thus, the id’s of objects are now in 6 figures
dunbarx wrote:
I was comforted back in the day with engine assigned ID's that were
not user settable. It was nice to know that these were unique and
somewhat apart from all other properties.
What was the rationale for making them changeable?
It wouldn't be possible to make a text-based
Hi Richard,
I know that's why this capability was introduced but I've always wondered
if a vcs could get by without it.
The ID of a stack has always been changeable and, as I understand it,
indicates the ID of the next control to be created in the stack. That
being the case, it seems like it
Peter Haworth wrote:
The ID of a stack has always been changeable and, as I understand it,
indicates the ID of the next control to be created in the stack. That
being the case, it seems like it would be possible for the vcs to sort a
stack's controls by their id number, create the stack, set
Peter Haworth pete@... writes:
I'm probably missing something obvious but wouldn't that work?.
No. You can change a stack's id to something greater than its current value,
but you can't go in the reverse direction.
--
Mark Wieder
ahsoftw...@gmail.com
Ender Nafi Elekcioglu endernafi@... writes:
1. My background group has completely gone crazy.
Now the group itself is *shared* and *background*, but its controls are not.
Interesting, isn’t it?
That sounds wrong. Controls in a background group should also be in the
background.
I have tens
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Mark Wieder mwie...@ahsoftware.net wrote:
Why? When I need to do something like that I will most likely show/hide
groups of controls rather than copying them or making them from scratch.
That way you don't have to be concerned about the id pool, as nothing is
As Alan and John suggested;
The standalone reverts back to its initial state; no matter how many
controls/ids are created during runtime.
*answer the id of this stack* returns 1.008.815 each time I open the app in the
simulator or device.
Combining this fact with Richard's info:
IDs are 4-byte
Hi all,
I have an app which is been developed for a very long time.
Many controls; including buttons, field, images, etc,; have been added and
deleted countless times.
Thus, the id’s of objects are now in 6 figures: 107620.
It worries me somehow; because of int16 thing.
You know, no object’s
Ender-
You can set the id of any control. But be very careful... ids have to
be unique within a stack. The stack will generate new ids for controls
sequentially. If you query the id of the stack you will see what the
next control will be. You can set the id of the stack higher, but not
lower,
Mark hi,
You can set the id of any control. But be very careful...
That’s why I didn’t want to do it manually,
it doesn’t seem to me as a good idea to meddle with the internal routines of
Livecode.
What I understand from your answer, there isn’t any built-in command like
*reindexControls*
20 matches
Mail list logo
