UPDATE: Make stack close itself

Bob Sneidar bobsneidar at iotecdigital.com
Wed May 21 14:31:52 EDT 2014

Okay well that is making a little more sense. So if I put an on idle handler in all my stacks and then pass the message, it should filter down to my mainstack. I suppose I could insert the stack-closing-code in all my substacks, but that makes me feel dirty somehow. ;-)

Bob S

On May 21, 2014, at 11:28 , Richard Gaskin <ambassador at fourthworld.com> wrote:

> Alejandro Tejada wrote:
>> Idle command only runs on the stack when it has
>> the mouse pointer focus... or at least this is how
>> I understand this behavior of Idle.
> Good catch, Alejandro.
> There are a handful of messages which have this sort of "existential" behavior (mousewithin is another) - from the Dictionary entry for "idle":
>   Note: If there is no idle handler anywhere in the message path,
>   no idle message is sent.
> That Dictionary entry also provides examples of using timers instead, noting:
>   Note: Usually, it is easier and more efficient to use the send
>   in time form of the send command than to use an idle handler,
>   especially if a task needs to be executed at regular intervals.
> One of the reasons LiveCode is arguably the fastest xTalk ever is that great care has been put into pruning messages and token table lookups....
> --
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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

More information about the Use-livecode mailing list