Rules governing stack purging
dcragg at lacscentre.co.uk
Tue Oct 31 15:09:32 EST 2006
On 31 Oct 2006, at 19:27, Richard Gaskin wrote:
> By honoring the destroyStack property consistently with its
> behavior for "go" and "open", we would gain greater certainty about
> what's in memory.
Perhaps we see destroyStack differently. Like Trevor, I see it as
something that comes into effect when you close a stack. In the cases
we're discussing, no specific "close stack" is performed. So why
should the destroyStack property come into play? I don't think
destroyStack has lost its honor (if it ever had any :-)).
> Under what circumstances do you want to save changes to a stack
> that you neither open nor have its destroyStack left in its default
As I said, I don't think destroyStack is relevant. But if I use a
stack as a data file, I want to read data, write data, and save the
file. Am I missing something?
> Ever make multi-user apps? I make quite a few.
Come on, Richard! Stack files weren't made for multi-user access.
That's what databases are for. Of course we can use them, but we must
expect to do a bit of work. In this case, either "delete stack" or
"close stack" when you're finished with it, and whatever you do to
indicate a file lock.
> I'm not sure what "normal" means in this context. I think a lot of
> single-user apps are "abnormal". :)
You've been looking at my work again. :-)
More information about the Use-livecode