Hi all,
Well I am about to flip my lid!
I let my IOS membership expire a few months back and after renewing again I am
yet to be able to actually install an App successfully into a device.
I have spat the dummy today and basically deleted everything from the iOS
provisioning portal and started
Looking over this, this looks correct. For correct input and output it is
equivalent to the logic based formula that I gave.
On May 17, 2014, at 11:54 AM, Scott Rossi wrote:
> Maybe unnecessary for LC7, but for my work in LC6 (and anybody that's
> interested), I put together the following
Yes, 65535 is the upper limit for characters that don’t need surrogate pairs.
(Technically, 65535 and 65534 are not characters, but ignoring that, it is 16
bits.)
On May 17, 2014, at 11:54 AM, Scott Rossi wrote:
> Maybe unnecessary for LC7, but for my work in LC6 (and anybody that's
> inter
Hi Richmond,
I visited this webpage:
http://www.russellcottrell.com/greek/utilities/SurrogatePairCalculator.htm
and tested the webpage results against your stack.
Why your stack shows this result?
Enter Pair Numbers here
55241 + 56228 = 9124
Enter Unicode address here
10012 = 55241 + 56228
Tha
I had problems with it working, then not working, then working. I went to
livecode 7 and it works nicely. The new revBrowserOpenCep is especially nice,
with controls
Sent from my iPad
> On May 17, 2014, at 3:38 PM, "Serge Brami" wrote:
>
> just in regular stacks
>> Le 17 mai 2014 à 11:52, j.
On 5/17/14 12:03 PM, "Richmond" wrote:
>>One item that would be helpful to know is at what value does a unicode
>>character start being represented as pairs? Is 65536 the upper limit for
>>single value characters?
>>
>
>
>Representing as pairs starts at Hex D800 = Decimal 55296
Using that num
just in regular stacks
Le 17 mai 2014 à 11:52, j...@souslelogo.com a écrit :
> Just wondering : are you tring to open revbrowser in a regular stack
> or in a modal stack ? I've had issues with incompatibilities between
> revbrowser and modal stacks...
>
> jbv
>
>>
>> revbrowser doesn’t work on
On 17/05/14 20:54, Scott Rossi wrote:
One item that would be helpful to know is at what value does a unicode
character start being represented as pairs? Is 65536 the upper limit for
single value characters?
Representing as pairs starts at Hex D800 = Decimal 55296
Richmond.
_
On 17/05/14 20:54, Scott Rossi wrote:
Maybe unnecessary for LC7, but for my work in LC6 (and anybody that's
interested), I put together the following functions for converting a
unicode surrogate pair to a single value and vice versa:
function unicodePairToNum pNum1,pNum2
return (pNum1 - 552
Maybe unnecessary for LC7, but for my work in LC6 (and anybody that's
interested), I put together the following functions for converting a
unicode surrogate pair to a single value and vice versa:
function unicodePairToNum pNum1,pNum2
return (pNum1 - 55296) * 1024 + (pNum2 - 56320) + 65536
end
But there's also the very popular iOS development. I think Richard was only
discussing desktop customers.
On May 17, 2014 10:24:39 AM CDT, Terence Heaford
>
>From a developers point of view, if only 11% of LiveCode developers are
>on Mac then the future viability of LiveCode for Mac may be th
Terence Heaford wrote:
> Perhaps you need to differentiate which hat you are wearing at
> any particular point. :) (I wrote "our customers", as opposed
> to "RunRev's customers”)
I'll try to be even more explicit, but in general LiveCode's OS
percentages don't matter much to any of us, not even
Sorry Richard, my misunderstanding.
Perhaps you need to differentiate which hat you are wearing at any particular
point. :) (I wrote "our customers", as opposed to "RunRev's customers”)
>From a developers point of view, if only 11% of LiveCode developers are on Mac
>then the future viability of
Terence Heaford wrote:
> I was reading the above blog on LiveCode’s site:
>
> http://livecode.com/blog/2014/05/15/multimedia-on-macos/
>
> and noted this comment from Richard Gaskin.
>
> "Can you describe how this new player helps the process toward
> similar feature parity for the other 89% of o
On 17/05/14 16:17, Terence Heaford wrote:
I have not confused anything, I am simply talking about the LiveCode developer
base to which I believe Richard Gaskin was referring.
My question is simply related to a very small developer base of 11% Mac.
I wonder what the real proportions are of peo
I have not confused anything, I am simply talking about the LiveCode developer
base to which I believe Richard Gaskin was referring.
My question is simply related to a very small developer base of 11% Mac.
I haven’t raised capitalism nor Karl Marx, what has capitalism or Karl Marx got
to do wit
It's amazing what cheap titles I will attach to my postings
just to attract attention:
http://forums.runrev.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=20220&p=103810#p103810
Richmond.
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to s
Check this out.
Maybe it will help ?
http://forums.runrev.com/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=20416
Sent from my iPhone
> On 17 May 2014, at 4:48 am, "Dan Friedman" wrote:
>
> Greetings! I have looked all over for the answer to this and can't find the
> solution. I have read that others have the sam
Identical
Sent from my iPhone
> On 16 May 2014, at 11:13 pm, "Trevor DeVore"
> wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Nakia Brewer
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Trevor,
>>
>> On the same day I tried 6.7DP3 and got the same errors...
>
>
> Did the log look the same?
>
> --
> Trevor DeVore
> Blue
On 17/05/14 13:32, Terence Heaford wrote:
What would happen if the use of LiveCode development on a Mac diminished from
11% to say 1% what would be the incentive for LiveCode to develop for this
platform?
When all said and done, they are in it for the money.
I jalouse that's a bit unkind in
What would happen if the use of LiveCode development on a Mac diminished from
11% to say 1% what would be the incentive for LiveCode to develop for this
platform?
When all said and done, they are in it for the money.
All the best
Terry
On 17 May 2014, at 10:48, Richmond wrote:
> That is n
Just wondering : are you tring to open revbrowser in a regular stack
or in a modal stack ? I've had issues with incompatibilities between
revbrowser and modal stacks...
jbv
>
> revbrowser doesnt work on my mac new mac pro
>
> config = live code 6.6.1 mac os X maverick web navigator safari
>
>
On 17/05/14 09:54, Terence Heaford wrote:
I was reading the above blog on LiveCode’s site:
http://livecode.com/blog/2014/05/15/multimedia-on-macos/
and noted this comment from Richard Gaskin.
"Can you describe how this new player helps the process toward similar feature
parity for the other 8
On 17/05/14 05:19, Dar Scott wrote:
The good news is that LiveCode 7 will not have this problem, but it still might
sneak in if one is not careful.
With LiveCode 7, the codePoint chunk will apply even to U+1F4DE (a new
character, I guess, for a phone?), that is, 128222. However, if you look a
revbrowser doesn’t work on my mac new mac pro
config = live code 6.6.1 mac os X maverick web navigator safari
rev browser doesn’t open any anything even the browser sampler from the
resources menu doesn’t do anything
Any idea about what direction I have to explore to fix this problem ?
T
Just for the record, there's a lot of places where you can append more code or
garbage to properly formatted commands without any error, sometimes functional,
sometimes not. Basically appendixes of non-functional code. All these examples
compile without problem:
split x by return and tab put
Do you know of a way to get a list of open stacks that reliably
indicates their layer order within the LC session?
The docs say 'the openStacks' is the list of stacks in front-to-back
order, but I'm finding it isn't accurate much of the time. There seems
to be some interaction between it and t
27 matches
Mail list logo
