Set DoubleClickInterval very low!

[Richard Gaskin]

Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami wrote:

 > On 8/3/16, 9:02 PM, Mark Waddingham wrote:
 >
 >> In order for you to be able to do completely different things on
 >> click and double click you need to wait and see if a double click
 >> occurs before the doubleClickInterval and if it does not *then* do
 >> the single click action. After all, the engine is not clairvoyant.
 >>
 >> This is why click then double click should always be an incremental
 >> and related action - unless you want a pause in processing the
 >> single click
 >
 > @ Mark
 > which confirms that lowering the doubleClick Interval to thereby
 > increase responsiveness of a single click is not a bug, but, just
 > the way it works…

In my reading it very clearly confirms the opposite.

The quoted portion from Mark refers to the relatively rare edge case in 
which one might want to process both single- and double-clicks in a control.

In such a case the OS-provided messages are working as designed, LC's 
support of those messages is fine, and any delay has been introduced by 
the scripter attempting a dual interaction mode for a single control.

Thus far we haven't seen anything in this discussion or anyone else's 
direct experience suggesting that the doubleClickInterval has any effect 
on single clicks.

For the reasons I noted in my earlier post, you may want to review your 
libraries for where that's happening.  And since you're reducing the 
doubleClickInterval to a value below what the user expects, you might 
consider removing that dual model altogether and finding a different 
means of delivering the options you're seeking to provide for the user.

-- 
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Systems
  Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
  ____________________________________________________________________
  Ambassador at FourthWorld.com                http://www.FourthWorld.com