ID's are settable???

[Richard Gaskin]

Bob Sneidar wrote:

 > On Jan 13, 2011, at 10:26 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
 >> DunbarX wrote:
 >> So the id of a new object is indexed from the current stack ID.
 >> I thought (for no reason at all) it was the other way around,
 >> that the stack took on the id of a new object.
 >
 >> Unless I misunderstand, I think the difference is
 >> semantic/philosophical.
 >
 > Not really imho. The engine looks at the stack ID, creates a new
 > object, gives it that ID then increments the stack ID. Otherwise
 > it would be like arguing whether an increase in the bank balance
 > caused a deposit, or the deposit changed the bank balance. :-)
 > (GOD I love analogies!)

I think we're at the point, as Paul might say, where we're picking fly 
poop out of pepper, but since we've already gone this far:

Your sense of this seems to mirror my own, in which the stack "gives" 
the ID to the object, rather than that the stack "took" the ID from the 
object.

For any practical purpose, it doesn't matter and we can't know which 
occurs first (though I suppose Mark Waddingham could chime in here and 
tell us which line in the source occurs before the other).

All I know is that by the time we're able to know anything about the 
IDs, both the most highest-ID object in the stack and the stack itself 
have the same ID.

I'll leave it to the philosophers to determine which "gives" the ID to 
the other, spending my time instead pondering the bigger question:  if a 
stack crashes on a machine that isn't running, does it make a noise?  ;)

--
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World
  LiveCode training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com
  Webzine for LiveCode developers: http://www.LiveCodeJournal.com
  LiveCode Journal blog: http://LiveCodejournal.com/blog.irv