Trying a custom handler for several math fields

[Vaughn Clement]

Hi Richard

So you see the value in having the scripting, and you see the capability is
there to add the script elements today, then it should be a challenge of
some degree to have it made know it is needed.

 I proposed yesterday to add a Cloud app "My Codebook Pro v12" to be
available for free to any LC user/s. Here this kind of script can be
offered and amended by other developers to allow all users to benefit from
the code. So far I have not heard any conversation pro or con about this
offer. Since this would be a LC public access app, the new users could use
it like the (index / Table of Contents) I stated was not available on the
LC site today. I am sure that the rebuttal would be that LC's forum is
available and does this now. My answer is that the current forum is not
effective to find answers to technical question in that it is not a subject
oriented database, but rather a word search for any word in blog fields.
This kind of search is OK but it does not lend it's self to subject
searches to specific topics of interest. A subject index has specific areas
where users can maintain a discussion on a minor issue to a major
discussion on a topic. And each person can offer any kind of references or
other suggestions to help any user. The LC help email's are such a good
example of this in that they are people engaging in the discussion. But the
email is gone soon after the reader reviews it. Or if they leave it in the
email bin, it can be searched later. But again what if you did not get the
email, your not a part of the discussion.

I have a friend who said that it will work, but will the input be valid. He
was saying that the uncertainty of the support being added may be wrong. My
answer is, this may be true, but not allowing us to try it out will not
supply the users to see the results.

Thank you

Vaughn Clement

Apps by Vaughn Clement (Support)
*http://www.appsbyvaughnclement.com/tools/home-page/*
Skype: vaughn.clement
https://secure.join.me/appsbyvclement
FaceTime: vclement at gmail.com
LogMeIn also avaialble
Call on "ooVoo" at address:  vaughnclement or 9282549062
Ph. 928-254-9062
Cloud Hosting Registration Web Site:
https://my.oditech.com/cart.php?a=add&pid=41


On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Richard Gaskin <ambassador at fourthworld.com
> wrote:

> Vaughn Clement wrote:
>
> > Frankly I was surprised that LC did not recognize commas and money
> > symbols. This is a standard thing in almost any software that has
> > numbers being used? I would think it could be added to the object
> > inspector to set the money settings, and maybe still treat the field
> > as a string for purposes of calculations.
>
> I think this boils down to the difference between a general-purpose
> programming language like LiveCode (and C, Python, Lua, etc.), and more
> specialized tools like Excel and FileMaker.
>
> Since Excel and FileMaker were written in C, we could say that this is
> something that even C can handle.  But it takes a great many lines of C to
> be able to produce a system that separates storage from display, and while
> we can do this in LC with a fraction of the number of lines required, it
> still takes some scripting.
>
> Similarly, both Excel and FileMaker have automatic behaviors associated
> with cells/fields, but as you've found we need to explicitly respond to
> specific messages in LC to trigger behaviors like calculations.
>
> As convenient as these automated elements are in special-purpose tools,
> they greatly restrict the range of things that can be built with them. A
> spreadsheet will always look like a spreadsheet, and a FileMaker DB will
> also look and behave like a FileMaker DB (which is why we see so many LC
> devs making front-ends for DB systems like FileMaker, so they can deliver
> custom UIs not possible in those highly-specialized tools).
>
> All that said, as I noted before I think it would add tremendous value to
> LC to adopt an option to automatically separate storage format from display
> format for both fields and chunks, and have added my notes from my earlier
> post to the feature request for this:
> <http://quality.runrev.com/**show_bug.cgi?id=7891<http://quality.runrev.com/show_bug.cgi?id=7891>
> >
>
> In the meantime, we can have exactly what we're looking for right now with
> a bit of scripting.  I mention this not to suggest RunRev shouldn't invest
> the time to do that in the engine (since of course I do feel it would be
> very valuable), but only to note that there's nothing stopping anyone from
> having this today if they're willing to roll up their sleeves for an hour
> or two and work it out.  After all, there are many dozens of apps in the LC
> community that have done this already.
>
>
> --
>  Richard Gaskin
>  Fourth World
>  LiveCode training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com
>  Webzine for LiveCode developers: http://www.LiveCodeJournal.com
>  Follow me on Twitter:  http://twitter.com/**FourthWorldSys<http://twitter.com/FourthWorldSys>
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/**mailman/listinfo/use-livecode<http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode>
>