On 31 Oct 2006, at 19:27, Richard Gaskin wrote:
By honoring the destroyStack property consistently with its behavior for "go" and "open", we would gain greater certainty about what's in memory.
Perhaps we see destroyStack differently. Like Trevor, I see it as something that comes into effect when you close a stack. In the cases we're discussing, no specific "close stack" is performed. So why should the destroyStack property come into play? I don't think destroyStack has lost its honor (if it ever had any :-)).
Under what circumstances do you want to save changes to a stack that you neither open nor have its destroyStack left in its default setting?
As I said, I don't think destroyStack is relevant. But if I use a stack as a data file, I want to read data, write data, and save the file. Am I missing something?
Ever make multi-user apps? I make quite a few.
Come on, Richard! Stack files weren't made for multi-user access. That's what databases are for. Of course we can use them, but we must expect to do a bit of work. In this case, either "delete stack" or "close stack" when you're finished with it, and whatever you do to indicate a file lock.
I'm not sure what "normal" means in this context. I think a lot of single-user apps are "abnormal". :)
You've been looking at my work again. :-) Cheers Dave _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
