Musings on Architect, MVC, Nested Behaviors

Bob Sneidar bobsneidar at iotecdigital.com
Fri Dec 28 13:38:25 EST 2018


I think most would agree with you on this Richard. It's like stack files are evolving into flat files. Soon we won't need to write code, we will just think it. It's kind of like a Star Trek episode, only for software developers. :-)

Bob S


> On Dec 28, 2018, at 09:49 , Richard Gaskin via use-livecode <use-livecode at lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> 
> J. Landman Gay wrote:
> 
> > On December 27, 2018 8:54:29 PM Richard Gaskin via use-livecode
> > <use-livecode at lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> At your prompting I started to open an enhancement request for this,
> >> but not long into it I hit on why they probably haven't done this
> >> yet:
> >>
> >> By what means would be indicate which properties we want saved there
> >> and which ones we don't care about?
> >
> > I wasn't thinking that expansively. I'd be happy with just the ability
> > to use breakpoints during development, perhaps tied to the Test button
> > as the remote debugger is now. As Brian said, if we want it to act
> > like a regular stack we can just use one.
> 
> In the beginning, script-only stacks contained only a script.
> 
> Later, accommodation was made to allow the behavior property there, using the "with behavior" clause.
> 
> Now we're considering adding breakpoints.
> 
> Are we sure that's where it ends?
> 
> It might be. But are we sure?
> 
> Using a paired LSON file for other properties is reasonable enough. Should that be used for breakpoints as well?
> 
> Where should the dividing line fall with what's included in what used to be script-only stacks?
> 
> -- 
> Richard Gaskin





More information about the Use-livecode mailing list