Revolution and the Web, feedback wanted, Part 1 of 3
J. Landman Gay
jacque at hyperactivesw.com
Fri Dec 1 14:56:56 EST 2006
>> I'll agree with the first comparison, but have to disagree with the
>> second. MetaCard and Revolution are identical in every respect except
>> for the stacks that represent how the user interacts with the engine.
> Now I'm confused. I thought MetaCard didn't have all the gui niceties
> that RR does,
> and was more of a text engine. So since I apparently
> have no idea how we got where we are, can you expand a bit more on
> what MetaCard was? Was this just a simple case of RR saying "Hey,
> this is great, but we can make it better"?
Pretty much, I think.
Do you mean "test" engine? MC has sort of become that in a way. Since
its IDE is so much simpler than Rev's, most bugs that are reproducible
in MC are usually engine bugs, though not all.
MetaCard was the original product until Runtime took over. Now it is
just another alternate IDE, though as you mention, the GUI is less
elaborate. But everything that can be done in Rev can also be done in MC
because the engine is the same, and in some cases, the GUI is similar as
well. They are more alike than different. I use both, all the time, for
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jacque at hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
More information about the Use-livecode