IDE versus MSG Box - Field Tabstops

[Richard Gaskin]

Geoff Canyon wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 1:20 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
...
>> The tabStops issue is distinguished from those by one key principle:
>>
>> Whether we prefer the behavior those examples exhibit or not, the behavior
>> is consistently applied, regardless of the values in the data being acted
>> on.
>>
>> But with tabStops, the behavior differs with different data.
>>
>> That's a big ouch, making it impossible to write a handler which can
>> reliably automate the setting of tabStops if the range of values is
>> sufficiently dynamic.
>>
>
> I don't know what you mean by , can you give me an example?

I provided one several posts ago yesterday:
<http://lists.runrev.com/pipermail/use-livecode/2013-August/191423.html>

> I still don't understand why you use words like "crudely."

Apparently the keepers of the engine agree there's a better way to 
handle relative column width specs, having taken the time to provide the 
tabWidths property.

It's clear we both feel differently about this, and for backward 
compatibility I'm inclined to agree that we should keep this token as is 
unless we can find more than one person who's been adversely affected by it.

I just find it odd, as much as I find "destroyStack" and being able to 
use property syntax for some functions but not others odd.

Ultimately Mark makes the final call on such things, and having already 
provided an alternative to tabStops that's both more convenient and more 
consistent, I'm disinclined to pursue this further.

Peace, my friend.  In matters of taste there can be no dispute.

-
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World
  LiveCode training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com
  Webzine for LiveCode developers: http://www.LiveCodeJournal.com
  Follow me on Twitter:  http://twitter.com/FourthWorldSys