"Ask us anything" and the executionContexts

[Dick Kriesel]

On 12/17/05 9:50 AM, "Ken Ray" <kray at sonsothunder.com> wrote:

> On 12/17/05 3:14 AM, "Dick Kriesel" <dick.kriesel at mail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Your answer left me a hope that maybe we were just a BZ away from being able
>> to use the executionContexts in a standalone, so I decided to search BZ
>> before asking about that possibility.
> 
> Dick, are you saying that you can't use executionContexts in a standalone?
> Or that you need to know how to use it?

Thanks for asking, Ken.  My answer is neither:  I'm concerned because of the
following message from Scott Raney, which leads me to think there may be
some disqualifying problem in the design or implementation of the
executionContexts.

On 05/31/03 10:54 PM, "Scott Raney" <raney at metacard.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 31 May 2003 curry <curry at pair.com> wrote:
> 
>> How about a function that returns the name of the handler that called
>> the current handler? For example, this would be useful when a handler
>> needs to reset each time a different handler calls it, or to keep
>> track of different sets of data for each handler that calls it.
> 
> You can get this information with the executionContexts function.  I
> hesitate to even mention it, however, because it was designed for
> debugging purposes *only*: using it for conditional execution would
> be, IMHO, heinous.  Use an optional parameter instead unless you want
> your status as an xTalk wizard permanently revoked.
>   Regards,
>     Scott

Even though I don't have the status of xTalk wizard, that sounds pretty
foreboding.

-- Dick