Using "go card" on Linux standalone with -ui

[Ben Rubinstein]

Richard, Mark, thanks for your continuing responses.

On 21/09/2011 16:37, Richard Gaskin wrote:
> Ben Rubinstein wrote:
>> I need to go to particular cards, to avoid masses of rewriting of
>> this app which more normally runs with a GUI, as the scripts reference
>> controls and properties on different cards.
> Why do you need to "go" to a card? Data can be accessed from any object, even
> those that aren't "opened".

Yep, I 'need' to use 'go' only to avoid rewriting a lot of code.  The app does 
a bunch of functionality, guided by 'scripts' (not LC scripts); most of my 
(handful) of clients use it interactively, with a GUI (some use it from the 
command line as a scheduled task as well, but this has to date always been on 
machines running Windows, that have a GUI even if nobody can see it).  This is 
the first case where we want to deploy it as a scheduled task on machine 
without a GUI.  It's not worth that level of rewriting to make it work - for 
this particular case I could by now have coded an alternative in Python - 
especially since much of the value of this is that all the functionality of 
the app should be available.

So I don't 'need' to use go - but I want to!

On 22/09/2011 03:04, Mark Wieder wrote:
 > I don't think it's a big mystery - any sort of a UI operation: go to
 > card x, show field, etc, might well have assertions to make sure the
 > engine isn't going to grobble off the end of the road. I think that's
 > a proper use of assertions, but there should also be a check to make
 > sure that we're not in -ui mode beforehand.

Surely the point is that all those operations should be - and AFAICT most are 
- implemented with suitable checks to make sure there is a UI; and that the 
assertion is revealing one which hasn't been.  I just wondered if anyone else 
had come across this before and found out which operation it is that has this 
problem.

Ben