ambassador at FourthWorld.com
Wed Feb 27 04:49:01 EST 2002
> It seems like many people are thinking with the workaround approach--how can
> I get around the lack of this feature. That's fine for real missing
> features, and is a common thing to do in xTalk or any other very high level
> development system, but this mouse() function is a feature that has been
> around forever and a day, and works very well for these types of behaviors.
> It is much easier to implement in the situations where it's most often used.
> It also is more readable in many situations. (There are good situations for
> using the event handlers too, of course.)
I have a least a layman's understanding of both sides of this, and while I
appreciate the technical challenge I also recognize the convenience of
In my own work, most of my arguments in favor of polling go away as long as
I have a solution to whatever it is I'm working on.
Let's try this:
Can we come up with a situation in which mouseMove cannot provide what
polling the mouse state in a loop provides?
Fourth World Media Corporation
Custom Software and Web Development for All Major Platforms
Developer of WebMerge 1.9: Publish any Database on Any Site
Ambassador at FourthWorld.com http://www.FourthWorld.com
Tel: 323-225-3717 AIM: FourthWorldInc
More information about the Use-livecode