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