Stack with the same name loop

Richard Gaskin ambassador at
Thu Oct 7 13:45:13 EDT 2021

Standalone building needs to be a separate process.

In the olden days, standalones were build by merging the stack file on 
disk with the engine, with no changes or additions to objects inside the 

When new features were introduced which requiring adding library button 
inside a newly-created group on the mainstack's first card, then later 
adding more options to add and separate substacks/other stack files, the 
build process became much more complex.

In the olden days you could be deep in your work context, running your 
app with specific windows open with certain data set up just as you need 
it to observe what you're working on, then select "Build Standalone" and 
nothing you've so carefully arranged is at all altered; the standalone 
is quickly built in a second or so and you can continue with what you're 

Accommodating the newer stack-altering features has created a world in 
which you lose your work context, windows appear and disappear in a 
dizzying display, it sometimes takes a very long time, and when 
everything settles down if it all goes well and the jostling finally 
subsides, you're left with a work context that has your mainstack open 
but everything else you've carefully arranged is gone.

Tons of code have been added to the IDE to account for the many 
implications that come along with attempting to make copies of stacks in 
memory, initializing them to be able to add/modify them, doing those 
mods, and then attempting to restore at least the bare minimum of the 
work context you'd had.

Along the way, all that added IDE code has led to side-effects, like 
those discussed in this thread.

As a separate process, the Standalone Builder need not bother with any 
concern about duplicate stacks at all, because there wouldn't be any.

But the biggest benefit is restoring the smooth, enjoyable workflows we 
once had, back when we didn't have to pause to ask ourselves if we 
really need to make that test build, because doing so will dramatically 
alter our workspace.

Bonus that new users won't have to watch the parade of stacks flashing 
about during the sometimes-lengthy process.

  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Systems

Bob Sneidar wrote:

 > Yes, building standalones is a huge problem. I think that when a
 > single platform standalone is created, the state Livecode ends up
 > in ought to be the state Livecode started in before you built the
 > standalone. This does not seem to be the case. Stacks opened during
 > the build process seem to remain open, but are the versions that were
 > saved when building the standalone, and NOT the ones belonging to the
 > project. Try building a Windows AND a MacOS standalone in a single
 > pass.
 > Of course, it's easy for me to imagine how this could be done, but I
 > suppose like most things, it's harder than I imagine.

More information about the use-livecode mailing list