Question About PreOpenStack
dunbarx at aol.com
dunbarx at aol.com
Sun Sep 11 15:17:52 CDT 2011
Glad to see you have worked it out. It is a subtle danger, that other messages can insinuate themselves into what we try to contain in what we believe is a well defined situation. This is especially true with the very similar "open/preOpen" and "stack/card" messages.
From: Gregory Lypny <gregory.lypny at videotron.ca>
To: use-livecode <use-livecode at lists.runrev.com>
Sent: Sun, Sep 11, 2011 10:44 am
Subject: Re: Question About PreOpenStack
I had posted this right (see below) after you in message 21. On reflection, the
behaviour makes sense, and so does Mark’s suggestion that I move the main
stack’s OpenStack handler to the card script.
> Hi Mark and Jacqueline,
> The substacks had PreOpenStack handlers that called a library stack and
sometimes emptied out some fields, but what they did not have OpenStack
handlers. The absence of OpenStack handlers appears to have been the problem
because, after the the sub-stack executes its own PreOpenStack, the main stack,
for whatever reason, executes its OpenStack. This, of course, can be disastrous
if the main stack is intended to initialize an app or perhaps contains sensitive
material that should not be revisited! My fix is to include an OpenStack
handler with nothing in it in every sub-stack in order to trap the message.
> on OpenStack
> ? Do nothing
> end OpenStack
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011, at 1:00 PM, use-livecode-request at lists.runrev.com wrote:
> Gregory, do you understand these nuances? Or is my original test, a simple
mainStack/subStack file with a preOpenStack handler in each stack script,
basically what you already have? Write back...
> Craig Newman
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
More information about the use-livecode