Simple Socket Saga

[Len Morgan]

Phil,

We may need to get a ruling from the judges on this one!  After seeing 
the statement you quoted in isolation, it seems it could be possible to 
have a button who's mouseUp handler calls a handler in a library stack 
that has the actual accept command.  In that case, the button is the 
target but the library stack actually contains the accept command.

Your idea of putting the accept further down in the message path is what 
I wanted to do but the documentation seemed to indicate this was not 
possible.

Can we get a ruling and clarification of the docs on this point from 
some of the more experienced members with socket experience?

len

Phil Davis wrote:
> len-morgan at crcom.net wrote:
>> Actually, I think the opposite is true: If the callback script is NOT in
>> the button script, it won't ever fire.  At least that's the way I 
>> read the
>> docs.
>>   
>
> My bad - you're right. That was my habit speaking.  ;-)  I habitually 
> place callback handlers further down the message path from the object 
> whose script opened the connection. But the docs say:
>
>    The callbackMessage is sent to the object whose script contains the
>    accept command.
>
> Thanks -
> Phil Davis
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
>
>