Program Testing and Persistent Properties

[Ken Ray]

On 8/7/04 10:41 PM, "Bob Warren" <warren at howsoft.com> wrote:

> I don't know whether Ken Ray posted his MARVELLOUS answer to the List, but
> in case not, here it is! QED. A ray of light has entered my brain! Well
> done, Ray.

Thank you... and I did indeed forget to post this to the list. Thanks for
doing so.

> There is one remaining question for those of you with experience in both VB
> and RunRev. Do you think it would be a good idea to make the "persisting
> properties" OPTIONAL as suggested by the penultimate "dream" picture of my
> article at http://www.howsoft.com/runrev/article.htm  ?

I think in order to do that we'd need to be able to know the difference
between the two states - design vs. run time. And right now, that's not
something one can easily figure out since Rev is really always at runtime.

One thing we *could* do might be do separate stack vs. standalone - i.e.
that when a stack is turned into a standalone, certain properties, text,
etc. is removed. Or we might be able to create an object-level property that
is like cantModify, but on an object-specific level.

However I think it would be a "hack" (if you'll excuse the word). Until and
unless Rev gets a true "design mode", any attempts at simulating a design
vs. run environment would be a kludge at best, IMHO.

I think it may be more important to focus on providing materials that will
allow VB (and other) programmers to make the mental shift to the Rev
paradigm.

But that's just one man's opinion...

Ken Ray
Sons of Thunder Software
Web site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/
Email: kray at sonsothunder.com