I guess so although that also has the same risk as a writable scriptOnly property so it seems to me we might as well run with the property and some documented warnings about losing objects and custom properties when setting it to true.
The other use case (which is similar) is someone transitioning to script only stacks as it would save a significant amount of creating new stacks with different names, cutting, pasting, deleting old stack, renaming and saving... I think in both cases the writable scriptOnly property is simpler. It probably only needs to be an IDE engine property as I can't imagine a use case for it in a standalone. Cheers Monte Sent from my iPhone > On 30 Aug 2015, at 5:19 pm, Ali Lloyd <[email protected]> wrote: > > Ah yes, I see what you mean. It would be very handy for that case. Another > option would be a variant of the save command, like > > save pStack as [(script only | binary) stack] pFilename _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list [email protected] Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
