A little Levure-oriented question
livfoss at mac.com
Wed Feb 21 11:46:20 EST 2018
OK, i’m a bit confused. If we look at a non-faceless application, then the user will be interacting with it via the UI. This means that stuff like clicking and dragging has to be dealt with. I see that this can all be done by a library that works out where the ‘mouseUp’ or whatever came from and then handles what is needed to be done and sent back to the user, but can there really be no code at all in the stack the user sees? What about a game-like interface, where the movement of objects relative to one another is something that has to be captured? I suppose what I’m saying is that if the essence of the app is the interaction between the objects the user sees, then abstracting the objects’ behaviour away from the primary interface only has the merit that it’s better for version control, doesn’t it? Or am I seeing it all wrong?
> On 21 Feb 2018, at 01:04, Mike Kerner via use-livecode <use-livecode at lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> You can move as much or as little as you like. I prefer to move everything
> and use an external text editor whenever I want to edit code. The .rev or
> .livecode stack file for me, then has multiple cards with the layouts and
> the objects, but no code in it. I also have taken to removing all
> substacks and making them separate, especially since in many cases those
> substacks are modules or libraries. That makes version control of those
> submodules and libraries far simpler for me.
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 6:43 PM, Trevor DeVore via use-livecode <
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 5:15 PM, Graham Samuel via use-livecode <
>> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>>> I’m following the Levure discussion and of course Trevor's pronouncements
>>> with great interest. One thing strikes me - is there really a universally
>>> understood meaning to the term “UI stack”? I do understand the concept of
>>> separating the UI from the logic of an app, but any UI must contain
>>> **some** logic, mustn’t it? In the LC world, by ‘logic’ of course I
>>> mean code. What level of coding is permissible to allow in a UI stack, do
>>> people think? I have a feeling that some folks’ idea of this is going to
>>> very different from some others’. Perhaps there is an orthodoxy about
>>> but I am not familiar with it.
>> In Levure a UI stack is just a stack that is used as a window to display a
>> user interface to the user. In LiveCode the term stack is overloaded. It
>> can be a library, a front script, a back script, or a stack that is
>> actually displays to the user. Actually it can be both a stack that
>> displays an interface to the user and a library/frontscript/backscript).
>> Levure encourages you to organize your stacks based on how they are used.
>> In Levure a UI stack will be added to the list of stackFiles property of
>> the main Levure app stack. This allows you to reference the stack by name
>> (e.g. stack “MyStack”) without having to load all of the UI stacks into
>> memory when the application starts up.
>> My general rule is that I place all code that is specific to a specific UI
>> stack in the behaviors attached to the stack, cards, and controls of that
>> stack. Any code that is shared is pushed down into a library.
>> The controls in my stacks have very little code. They simply call handlers
>> that reside in the card or stack behaviors.
>> Trevor DeVore
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>> subscription preferences:
> On the first day, God created the heavens and the Earth
> On the second day, God created the oceans.
> On the third day, God put the animals on hold for a few hours,
> and did a little diving.
> And God said, "This is good."
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
More information about the Use-livecode