REALLY close stack

[J. Landman Gay]

On 6/15/04 8:47 PM, Troy Rollins wrote:

> MUCH more reliable. Lesson learned. Like John mentioned, the suggested 
> method of Close Stack, while having a destroy property of TRUE, is 
> extremely unreliable... in fact, it generally doesn't work correctly, 
> causes script errors in properly formatted scripts, and creates 
> situations where only a restart of the IDE clears things up. Personally, 
> I think it should be deprecated. There are other ways to close or hide 
> the stack window while keeping the stack in memory if that is the desire 
> result.

Just for the record, I routinely close stacks that have their 
destroystack set to true and have never had any problem with it. It may 
be that the stack must be saved with that property first, before it 
works reliably (which would be a bug.) I have my preferences set to 
always create new stacks with the property set, and I have never seen a 
problem.

Note that you must be careful with "delete stack" and make sure you are 
only deleting mainstacks, which removes them from memory. If you use 
"delete stack" on a substack, the substack really will get permanently 
deleted from the stackfile and it will be gone forever.

-- 
Jacqueline Landman Gay         |     jacque at hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software           |     http://www.hyperactivesw.com