Watch out for 2.6 then going back to 2.5

[Dennis Brown]

I could use some help.  I am not sure how to approach trying to  
recover my stack.  I have lots of backups, but I have to go back many  
revisions to find a stack the does not produce this error (prior to  
my brief encounter with 2.6).  My stack is just one card, but it has  
many groups and hundreds of objects, and many new objects, most of  
which I have added or altered the properties and scripts since the  
good backup (I was restructuring the script organization and also  
added more functionality).  Thank goodness for Chipp Walters  
altArchive plugin.  Because of it I started making many more backup  
versions than I used to.  Anyway I have two stacks an old one that  
works and a new one with several days of extensive changes that is  
somehow corrupted in one or more ways.  If I copy objects over, I get  
all the changes, but do I get the corruption also?  The corrupted  
script is at the card level, but it seems like it is the engine that  
is failing at runtime, but the same engine runs the old stack, the  
compiler does not complain.  I tried deleting the card scripts and  
replacing them, but that did not help.  I am just not sure how to  
approach it to make sure I don't waste more time, and I get a good  
stack.

Dennis

On Jun 9, 2005, at 12:19 PM, Dennis Brown wrote:

> I switched to 2.6 for a few hours, and during that time I made some  
> edits and saved a stack I have been working on for some months.
> I switched back to 2.5.1 due to bugs so I could continue  
> development on my stack.  The stack acts goofy now.
> Here is a snippet of code:
>
>
>   repeat with j=1 to 20
>       put j --mssg box contains 1
>       get Typ[min(i+1+j,DateLines)] --error on this line
>
>
>          executing at 11:59:32 AM
> Type    Function: error in source expression
> Object    card id 1002
> Line    get Typ[min(i+1+j,DateLines)]
> Hint    card id 1002
>
> The error is complaining that j has not been defined yet!!!!
> When I look at the variable watcher, j is missing.  If I 'put j' in  
> the mssg box it is also missing.
> If I execute the get statement in the mssg box and substitute 1 for  
> j then it works.
>
> I think I have just lost another 2 days work due to 2.6  :-(
>
> I have to assume that 2.6 was rushed to meet the Tiger announcement  
> and did not go through the proper beta cycle.  Who does Beta  
> testing for these releases anyway?
>
> Dennis
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
>