Idle Messages to Hidden Stacks

Phil Davis revdev at pdslabs.net
Sat Feb 4 15:25:46 EST 2012


Hi Ray,

It seems your only choices are (1) put your stack outside the realm of those 
stacks flushing the events, or (2) structure your script so it isn't using 
messages to run.

Approach #1 means running it under a different instance of the engine (e.g. as a 
standalone that communicates with instance #1 via sockets for example), which 
could be pretty complex depending on what your stack is doing.

Approach #2 means running your stuff inside a repeat loop that has a 'wait x 
seconds with messages'  inside the loop. Seems like that would be impervious to 
flushEvents() but I haven't tested it.

Maybe someone else will think of other ways to handle your situation.

Best -
Phil Davis


On 2/4/12 10:59 AM, Ray Horsley wrote:
> I thought idle handlers ran in hidden stacks as long as they were top level.  Seems this has gone away.  Any ideas on this?  I'm trying to get an idle handler to run in a hidden stack but I can only send messages from that same stack.  Sending "idle" from the stack to itself in X seconds is not working because other handlers in stacks I have no control over are flushing events.
>
> Ray Horsley
> LinkIt! Software
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>

-- 
Phil Davis

PDS Labs
Professional Software Development
http://pdslabs.net





More information about the use-livecode mailing list