savingStandalone message

Ben Rubinstein benr_mc at
Tue Nov 15 08:34:25 EST 2016

I seem to recall that one A Lloyd made a sensible suggestion for rationalising 
this area:

Paul, I'd think that your needs (which certainly overlap with mine...) could 
be met by adopting Ali's suggestion in that report of a single message with 
parameter to indicate which platform was being built for, if there was an 
additional parameter to indicate that several standalones were being built at 
once. Even if it was as crude as:
	savingStandalone  "Windows", 1, 3
	savingStandalone  "iOS", 2, 3
	savingStandalone  "Android", 3, 3

That would allow work to be done for the general case to be coded once, even 
if it actually ran three times; platform-specific cases to be handled; and if 
you wanted to do something like increment a build number to be the same across 
platforms, you could increment only for the "1/3" case.

On 15/11/2016 13:18, Paul Dupuis wrote:
> I make use of the savingStandalone message in a few projects. Generally,
> I would prefer a single message regardless of the number of platforms I
> am building for. For ecample, I set a incremental "build' number on
> savingStandalone and I would want that build number to be the same for
> all platforms built for. If the message was sent for each platform I
> suspect I could come up with some what to still do this, but the code
> complexity would increase for a relatively simple task.
> It would seem to me that if you are looking for platform specific
> actions to modify the stack(s) used in each platform build, then ideally
> you would want a set of platform specific messages. i.e
> savingStandaloneForWindows
> savingStandaloneForOSX
> savingStandaloneForiOS
> savingStandaloneForAndroid
> savingStandaloneForHTML5
> ...
> Or something like that. That way if you only meed to make a specific
> scripted stack modification for Android, you only need to handle that
> specific message.
> On 11/15/2016 4:45 AM, Ali Lloyd wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> Various tweaks to the standalone builder seem to have broken the way the
>> savingStandalone message is supposed to work
>> I have submitted a pull request that fixes it - the only wrinkle might be
>> that it reintroduces the following bug:
>>, namely that the
>> savingStandalone message gets sent for each build platform.
>> Now, my personal view is that that is how it should work, provided the
>> stack state is restored before building for the next platform. It allows a
>> more fine-grained build step where, if we added suitable parameters to the
>> message, you could for example ensure substacks with platform/architecture
>> specific resources were not included in the standalones where they are
>> irrelevant.
>> My question to you is the same as I asked Lyn Teyla in the above report:
>> Would the following behavior be a problem for your use case, and if so why?
>> store stack state (*)
>> repeat for each target architecture
>>    dispatch saving standalone message
>>    modify stack for per-arch settings
>>    deploy stack
>>    restore to state in (*)
>>    dispatch standalone saved message
>> end repeat
>> _______________________________________________
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> use-livecode at
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:

More information about the Use-livecode mailing list