Standalone build workaround

[Brian Milby]

What about a front script for the build process that would intercept and discard these messages? Could be inserted just before each action that used to be protected by lock messages (close/open stack).

Thanks,
Brian
On Sep 19, 2018, 11:41 PM -0500, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode <use-livecode at lists.runrev.com>, wrote:
> I do understand the dilemma and I can adapt. But to be fair, an
> uninitialized variable doesn't require a restart of the IDE. It's possible
> to script around that too, it's usually a one-liner, and doesn't have to be
> inserted in as many places.
>
> But what mainly concerned me was how it affected someone who couldn't
> explain the change and the inexplicable cascade of errors, and was
> frustrated enough to leave the platform behind.
>
> --
> Jacqueline Landman Gay | jacque at hyperactivesw.com
> HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
> On September 19, 2018 5:49:20 PM Monte Goulding via use-livecode
> <use-livecode at lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>
> > > On 20 Sep 2018, at 6:18 am, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode
> > > <use-livecode at lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Building a standalone is the whole point of the process of developing with
> > > LC, and now that it's so disruptive it kills the joy of choosing LiveCode.
> > >
> > > For more than a decade I've believed making the SB into a separate process
> > > would be a good idea.
> > >
> > > It's no longer a good idea. It's now a necessity.
> >
> > Unfortunately we are caught between leaving the stack in a state where any
> > local variables that are meant to be initialised are unset or letting the
> > engine do its thing when the stack reopens and send messages that allow
> > those initialisations to occur. The latter, while a big change, was
> > considered the lesser of two evils because at least it allows you to code
> > around the situation rather than just ending up with a stack in a state
> > where you need to quit and restart the IDE.
> >
> > Ideally, yes, standalone building (at least the parts that manipulate the
> > open stacks causing them to need to be reverted) would be a separate process.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Monte
> > _______________________________________________
> > use-livecode mailing list
> > use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> > subscription preferences:
> > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode