Rev suport user defined events?

[DunbarX at aol.com]

In HC, and I would bet in Rev, messages are sent regardless of whether 
there is a handler to trap them. If none, the message passes right through the 
engine into the ether. I don't know if there would be a savings in overhead 
to discard such messages at the outset; I suppose it would not hurt. At 
compile time Rev would have to examine all scripts everywhere, checking for 
matches.

But are you suggesting that the engine limit itself in this way for the 
sake of streamlining? I like your idea of adding a superMessage, but I also 
like the idea that messages come and go, trapped, or not, at the whim of the 
scriptor.

Craig Newman


In a message dated 5/17/09 1:01:36 PM, randall at randallreetz.com writes:


> Does it look ahead for all handlers and only bother to send messages that 
> have handlers to recieve them?  In my scheme, one would specifically 
> identify which properties to track (filtering for target objects:
> 




**************
Recession-proof vacation ideas.  Find free things to do in 
the U.S. 
(http://travel.aol.com/travel-ideas/domestic/national-tourism-week?ncid=emlcntustrav00000002)