Again with the start using

[Dar Scott]

On Wednesday, March 3, 2004, at 07:30 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote:

> If you need access to system messages, the most reliable place to hook 
> into them is in a fronscript.

Yeah.  I was being dense.  I was thinking of a library for supporting a 
family of custom controls.  As such I was thinking of a library stack.  
The availability of custom controls might increase if developers can 
hide some part and libraries might work for that.

> I would not heitate to describe a frontscript intended for general use 
> that doesn't pass all system messages as a bug to be reported to the 
> author.

If this is commonly held, then I might have some paths to success.

> The only problem with frontScripts is the number available at runtime, 
> currently limited to 10.  But in practice, as often as I use 
> frontScripts I've never needed more than three in all of the stuff 
> I've ever built.

Well if somebody made a dozen different kinds of, say, meters, then a 
dozen frontscripts in a complicated application would be a problem.  
But if these use a single stack library and/or a single frontscript, 
then the problem is minimized.  At least one of the rev libraries is a 
frontscript, so rev libraries add to the competition.

> Far more common than system message traps are collections of custom 
> routines, for which libraries are ideal and you can use up 50 at 
> runtime.

A more general solution for controls is creeping into my mind.  Other 
things will need other solutions.

Dar Scott