Applying scripts that don't compile

[J. Landman Gay]

On 7/2/2016 1:49 PM, Mark Wieder wrote:
> On 07/02/2016 09:56 AM, J. Landman Gay wrote:
>
>> I don't much care either since any change won't affect how I work,
>> though I do tend slightly towards Monte's suggestion. But I can think of
>> a reason why some might prefer to set a script that won't compile. If
>> you've been writing a very long script and haven't saved it yet, you may
>> want to preserve what you have and debug it later. Perhaps it's quitting
>> time, or your wife's gone into labor, or Armageddon is nigh and you're
>> hoping to survive it.
>
> There's a difference between saving a stack with work in progress and
> setting a script. Setting a script that won't compile has numerous
> complications - the handlers will disappear from the message list, etc.
>

It is possible to save the stack with the script editor frontmost, and 
the uncompiled script will be set and saved as-is. I've done that by 
accident and, as you say, all the handlers disappeared from the handler 
list, meaning it was set during the save. I've only done that once, but 
it did cause some issues which is why I'm learning toward Monte's 
suggestion.

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