lock/unlock screen

[J. Landman Gay]

On 9/20/12 2:31 PM, Richmond wrote:
>
> Would things not be easier to understand if each subsequent lockscreen
> was signalled in some
> sort of way so one can keep track of all the nested lockscreens

I think that would increase complexity and decrease functionality. As 
Thierry pointed out, scripts would break if you use anyone else's 
libraries. And there's not much advantage to tracking all that when the 
engine does it for you anyway.

> At present (as I'm sure 99% of the readers of this Use-List already
> know) each lockscreen
> is initiated like this:
>
> set the lockscreen to true
>
> and, as we have all recently become, almost painfully, aware, you can do
> that as many times
> as you like, but then have to do
>
> set the lockscreen to false
>
> just as many times to reverse the process

Not really. You don't have to track it at all. There are several ways to 
handle it:

1. Just ignore it. When the handlers are done the screen will unlock 
automatically.

2. If you always pair locks and unlocks in each handler, the situation 
will never arise.

3. If you do feel that you simply must make sure the screen is unlocked, 
the method is three lines of code:

  repeat until the lockscreen is false
    unlock screen
  end repeat

But I can't remember ever needing to do that. Have you ever run up 
against a problem with it?

-- 
Jacqueline Landman Gay         |     jacque at hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software           |     http://www.hyperactivesw.com