Revert Woes - Spoke too soon
Ken Ray
kray at sonsothunder.com
Sun Apr 25 00:43:04 EDT 2004
Dave, can you make your substack a mainstack? That way, you can revert just
it if you want to...
Just my 2 cents,
Ken Ray
Sons of Thunder Software
Email: kray at sonsothunder.com
Web Site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/
> -----Original Message-----
> From: use-revolution-bounces at lists.runrev.com
> [mailto:use-revolution-bounces at lists.runrev.com] On Behalf Of
> David Burgun
> Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2004 9:02 AM
> To: How to use Revolution; Brian Yennie
> Subject: Revert Woes - Spoke too soon
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> I spoke too soon. I tested the revert command in a test project,
> which had one main stack and one sub stack (the modal), in my real
> app, I have:
>
> MainStack (Dummy, the window is hidden).
> Sub-Stack Top Level Windows - Modeless, usually called up from Menu
> or Tool Palette.
> Sub-Stack Utilitity Level Modal Dialogs, called from button handlers
> in Top Level Sub-Stacks.
>
> If I issue a "revert" from the Utility level, it reverts back to the
> main stack, e.g. it reverts the Top Level Window too!
>
> So, is there no way to just have the revert on the current stack, not
> the whole of the sub-stacks?
>
> Thanks a lot
> Dave
>
>
> !!!!!!!!!!THANK YOU SO MUCH!!!!!!!!!!
>
> I just don't know how I missed this command! I was actually trying to
> see how the IDE did it when you use the "Close and Remove from
> Memory" command - your email came thru just at the right time!
>
> I just knew there was a "RunRev" oriented way of doing this! Now I
> have this in place, I can exploit the real Power Behind RunRev, I get
> more or less for free the ability to treat my data, GUI controls and
> code as one "unit". To a C/C++ programmer this is REAL POWER! Don't
> get me wrong you can do this in C/C++ BUT the amount of overhead in
> code and learning curve is huge! With RR it's already there! For
> Free! And it's Cross-Platform!!!!!
>
> The "revert" command is the piece of the puzzle I was missing. In
> fact I should probably NOT do the
>
> "save this stack" operation on the OK button? Since it will be saved
> when the main stack is saved, correct? The problem was I think, is
> that I was using positive logic, e.g. something gets saved if and
> only if you specifically save it (which is a "C" way of thinking) but
> actually the way that RunRev works is using (in my terms only, not a
> critisism, but rather a (good) feature), negative logic, e.g. it will
> be saved anyway, it's up to you to specially STOP it being saved!
> e.g. I was using the lack of a save command in the cancel handler to
> stop the data being updated, but of course it already had been
> updated and I needed to restore it! on cancel! Not, not save it!
>
> On question though, if I place the revert command in a function that
> is located inside the main stack, will the revert command work on the
> main stack or the sub stack? I am going to try it anyway, but I'd
> like to know what is *supposed* to happen.
>
> Thanks again!
>
> All the Best
> Dave
>
> >Diving into this one late, but I think the "revert" command is what
> >you are looking for.
> >
> >HTH,
> >Brian
> >
> >>I'll look at the stuff you suggested, but it seems like an awful
> >>lot of work compared to just reloading the sub-stack from disk if
> >>necessary. A simple command like "purgeStack" would surely do the
> >>trick?
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >use-revolution mailing list
> >use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> >http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
>
More information about the use-livecode
mailing list