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