Rules governing stack purging

Dave Cragg dcragg at lacscentre.co.uk
Tue Oct 31 15:09:32 EST 2006


On 31 Oct 2006, at 19:27, Richard Gaskin wrote:

>
> By honoring the destroyStack property consistently with its  
> behavior for "go" and "open", we would gain greater certainty about  
> what's in memory.

Perhaps we see destroyStack differently. Like Trevor, I see it as  
something that comes into effect when you close a stack. In the cases  
we're discussing, no specific "close stack" is performed. So why  
should the destroyStack property come into play? I don't think  
destroyStack has lost its honor (if it ever had any :-)).

> Under what circumstances do you want to save changes to a stack  
> that you neither open nor have its destroyStack left in its default  
> setting?

As I said, I don't think destroyStack is relevant. But if I use a  
stack as a data file, I want to read data, write data, and save the  
file. Am I missing something?


>
> Ever make multi-user apps?  I make quite a few.

Come on, Richard! Stack files weren't made for multi-user access.  
That's what databases are for. Of course we can use them, but we must  
expect to do a bit of work. In this case, either "delete stack" or  
"close stack" when you're finished with it, and whatever you do to  
indicate a file lock.

>
> I'm not sure what "normal" means in this context.  I think a lot of  
> single-user apps are "abnormal". :)

You've been looking at my work again. :-)


Cheers
Dave



More information about the Use-livecode mailing list