Behaviors and the message path
MikeKerner at roadrunner.com
Fri Dec 9 03:10:25 CET 2016
I think I need an example, because I'm not understanding the problem that
you're having with the current....behavior
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 7:40 PM, Bleiler, Timothy <bleiler at buffalo.edu>
> > On Dec 8, 2016, at 5:09 PM, mwieder <ahsoftware at sonic.net> wrote:
> > I don't see these as anomalies or inconsistencies, but as features that
> > implement proper object-oriented behavior. Tim- what "problems" do you
> > with the way this is implemented? Am I missing something?
> Thanks Mark. I probably shouldn’t have used the word “problems” anywhere
> in my post. I agree, there are terrific benefits with the current
> implementation of the behavior feature. My main concern was insuring that
> what I observed was intended. If everything I described is by design, then
> the “inconsistencies” I noted are in my conceptual model of the language
> (extended object message path vs concatenation of scripts). Is there a
> better model that accounts for how the engine implements behaviors than an
> unpredictable combination of the two I’ve identified? An oversimplified
> understanding of how the engine processes scripts can get even experienced
> developers into trouble. The dictionary entry on "behavior" only hints at
> the full power of the feature and it might be difficult to expand it
> without invoking an accurate model of the engine’s rule set for behaviors.
> Tim Bleiler, Ph.D.
> Instructional Designer, HSIT
> University at Buffalo
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
On the first day, God created the heavens and the Earth
On the second day, God created the oceans.
On the third day, God put the animals on hold for a few hours,
and did a little diving.
And God said, "This is good."
More information about the use-livecode