Saving standalone substacks

[James Hurley]

>
> Message: 26
> Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 16:30:22 -0600
> From: "J. Landman Gay" <jacque at hyperactivesw.com>
> Subject: Re: Saving standalone substacks
> To: How to use Revolution <use-revolution at lists.runrev.com>
> Message-ID: <4B295F7E.3030404 at hyperactivesw.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> James Hurley wrote:
>
>> Things I didn't know:
>>
>> 1)  I thought I would be saving to a substack.
>
> Substacks -- the ones embedded into a main stack -- become part of the
> standalone. Executables can't save data to themselves, no matter how
> many stacks they are composed of. So yeah, you need separate stacks on
> disk if you want to save them.
>
>> 2)  I was unaware of the "shutDownRequest" handler.
>>
>> Another question or two.
>>
>> 1)  How would  "StackRunner" differ from using my own splash screen?
>> 2)  How would "Revolution Player" differ from using my own splash  
>> screen?
>
> I don't think either of these would be much different. They are both
> basically splash standalones, though Rev's player has a few more
> restrictions I think. But with either of these, you'd need to put your
> saving instructions into each satellite stack, or else into a  
> backscript
> that you insert when your first stack opens. That's because both of
> these are already built standalones, so to add any scripted behavior  
> you
> have to use another stack to store the scripts in.
>
> (snip)
> -- 
> Jacqueline Landman Gay         |     jacque at hyperactivesw.com
> HyperActive Software           |     http://www.hyperactivesw.com
>

Jacque,

Thanks again. I put all of this to good use and it all seems to be  
working.

But I foresee one problem. I am setting up a  utility for a local  
volunteer group.

There will surely be occasion for upgrades and bug fixes down the  
road. And all of this after they have made additional data entries in  
the stand alone.
It would be possible for me to incorporate a means of extracting all  
the data entry work they have performed, make changes in the original  
satellite stack in the RunRev IDE, repopulate the fields with saved  
data and return it to them for further use.

What would be soooo much easier if I would have access to the  
satellite stack itself. All the data would be intact and I could  
easily make the changes in the IDE and send it back as a stand alone.
There would seem to be an advantage to using StackRunner or the RunRev  
Player in that the satellite stack is still intact and more easily  
modified.

Is there some was in the stand alone to make a clone of the satellite  
stack, or in some other way recreate the stack as a dot rev and  
available to the IDE?

Jim Hurley