Re: error with script opening application browser in 8

On 10/19/16 5:49 PM, Dr. Hawkins wrote: On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Bob Sneidar wrote: Works as advertised! Thanks jacque! It worked once for me, but not since. But I've got bigger fish at the moment (make that, bigger demons . . .) The demons are your problem, I'm afraid. But for t

Re: error with script opening application browser in 8

Do you get frequent fryer miles with those? Collect enough of those and you get a free fright. - -- Mark Wieder ahsoftw...@gmail.com -- View this message in context: http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/error-with-script-opening-application-browser-in-8-tp4709570p4709629.html

Re: error with script opening application browser in 8

On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 7:54 AM, Bob Sneidar wrote: > You fry demons??? ... > > how do they taste? > like chicken of course! You just have to marinate them in Holy Water for a couple of days they're too tough to new well and you get one Hell of a stomachache . . . -- Dr. Richard E. Hawkins,

Re: error with script opening application browser in 8

You fry demons??? ... how do they taste? Bob S On Oct 19, 2016, at 15:49 , Dr. Hawkins mailto:doch...@gmail.com>> wrote: On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Bob Sneidar mailto:bobsnei...@iotecdigital.com>> wrote: Works as advertised! Thanks jacque! It worked once for me, but not since. But

Re: error with script opening application browser in 8

On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Bob Sneidar wrote: > Works as advertised! Thanks jacque! It worked once for me, but not since. But I've got bigger fish at the moment (make that, bigger demons . . .) -- Dr. Richard E. Hawkins, Esq. (702) 508-8462

Re: error with script opening application browser in 8

Works as advertised! Thanks jacque! Bob S On Oct 18, 2016, at 22:28 , J. Landman Gay mailto:jac...@hyperactivesw.com>> wrote: It should (but doesn't) work like any other plugin: Open the Plugin Settings (bottom of the Plugins menu item) and select the app browser from the option menu button.

Re: error with script opening application browser in 8

On 10/18/16 2:15 PM, Dr. Hawkins wrote (about the Application Browser): Is there another way to automatically open it? It should (but doesn't) work like any other plugin: Open the Plugin Settings (bottom of the Plugins menu item) and select the app browser from the option menu button. S

error with script opening application browser in 8

I have the code snippet if the version < 8 then put "revApplicationOverview" into brsStk else put "revApplicationOverview" into brsStk --put "revIDEProjectBrowser" into brsStk end if if brsStk is not among the words of the openStacks then open stack brsStk end if in my setup routine. Bu

Re: No data in application browser in 8.0.2

I'm on holiday so I only have my 32-bit Linux laptop (Mint 18 xfce) with me, but have just installed 8.0.2 stable and the Application Browser (which I depend on) works "as it should". Richmond. On 08/13/2016 02:56 AM, Mark Wieder wrote: On 08/12/2016 10:06 AM, Ben Rubinstei

Re: No data in application browser in 8.0.2

On 08/12/2016 10:06 AM, Ben Rubinstein wrote: FWIW: I'm also a recidivist Application Browser user (though I'm trying to reform) but it's working fine for me in 8.1.0 dp3 on macOS 10.11.5. What platform are you seeing this issue on? Yes, the Application Browser is also working

Re: No data in application browser in 8.0.2

| http://www.hyperactivesw.com On August 12, 2016 11:20:05 AM "Dr. Hawkins" wrote: On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 8:27 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote: 7 is EOL, and the Application Browser is still in v8 as a plugin as it was in v7. Yes, but it doesn't work at the moment.

Re: No data in application browser in 8.0.2

On 12/08/2016 17:18, Dr. Hawkins wrote: On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 8:27 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote: 7 is EOL, and the Application Browser is still in v8 as a plugin as it was in v7. Yes, but it doesn't work at the moment. It opens, and displays nothing. FWIW: I'm also a

Re: No data in application browser in 8.0.2

On 12/08/2016 17:18, Dr. Hawkins wrote: > Yes, but it doesn't work at the moment. > > It opens, and displays nothing. > > And I'll point out again, until 8 works properly, 7 shouldn't be EOL . . . If there isn't a bug in the bug database, then we don't know about it, which means that it can't be f

Re: No data in application browser in 8.0.2

Dr. Hawkins wrote: > On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 8:27 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote: > >> 7 is EOL, and the Application Browser is still in v8 as a plugin >> as it was in v7. > > Yes, but it doesn't work at the moment. > > It opens, and displays nothing. What's t

Re: No data in application browser in 8.0.2

On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 8:27 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote: > 7 is EOL, and the Application Browser is still in v8 as a plugin as it was > in v7. Yes, but it doesn't work at the moment. It opens, and displays nothing. And I'll point out again, until 8 works properly, 7

Re: No data in application browser in 8.0.2

Dr. Hawkins wrote: > On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 5:00 AM, Mike Kerner >> If you mean the project browser, there is a bug report. > > No, I mean the application browser. > > I'm one of the ones that finds the project browser impractical, > enough so that I rarely fire up

Re: No data in application browser in 8.0.2

On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 5:00 AM, Mike Kerner wrote: > If you mean the project browser, there is a bug report. No, I mean the application browser. I'm one of the ones that finds the project browser impractical, enough so that I rarely fire up 8 and stay with 7. -- Dr. Richard E. Hawk

Re: No data in application browser in 8.0.2

oh, wait, there is no filter box in the pb in 8. there are no thumbnails, either :-( On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 8:00 AM, Mike Kerner wrote: > If you mean the project browser, there is a bug report. Click in the > filter box and it will show everything. There are definitely issues with > 8. Anot

Re: No data in application browser in 8.0.2

If you mean the project browser, there is a bug report. Click in the filter box and it will show everything. There are definitely issues with 8. Another is that you can't print scripts in color, for example. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@l

No data in application browser in 8.0.2

I took one of my brief forays into version 8 today--shorter even than usual. The application browser window comes up, but it's completely empty--with a dozen stacks loaded! -- Dr. Richard E. Hawkins, Esq. (702) 508-8462 ___ use-livecode mailing

Re: Livecode 6.7.10 Application Browser has a very long memory

On 03/13/2016 12:42 AM, RM wrote: Obviously ALL these stacks are being loaded into the memory when the NEW Livecode build is opened. The stacks aren't, but the list of "recent" stacks is stored as a custom property somewhere. I forget where. No doubt it's the preferences stack, which is more

Livecode 6.7.10 Application Browser has a very long memory

I opened LC 6.7.10 on my computer for the first time after I installed it and looked in the Application Browser [because of a Facebook posting by somebody else] and saw quite a number of stacks listed as being in the memory: how this is possible I just don't know, although they are all s

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 4:45 PM, Geoff Canyon wrote: > On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 2:41 PM, J. Landman Gay > wrote: > >> Okay, good to know. As Hermann mentioned, he had to learn its >> capabilities by reading our discussion. That's a problem I have with >> Navigator too. Its actions can be obscure t

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:10 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: > In this situation it is impossible to know where you are unless you can > always see the stack name. So I was trying to get the same view in > Navigator that I get in AB where the stack I'm in is always clearly > visible. In Navigator, once

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On 12/2/2015 4:38 PM, Peter Haworth wrote: Interesting discussion and just emphasizes how different folks have different needs for the IDE. I was wondering when you'd jump in. :) To be fair, I have only looked at your screen shots on the web site (they're very small on my screen, btw, so not

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On 12/2/2015 3:45 PM, Geoff Canyon wrote: >I spent a little time yesterday seeing if I could simulate a list of >stacks by lining up several navigators but it isn't very workable. ​I must still not be understanding this use case. Navigator has a list of stacks in the stack menu. The trade-off o

Re: Death of the Application Browser

Absolutely, and they all have their own benefits. Pete lcSQL Software Home of lcStackBrowser and SQLiteAdmin On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Geoff Canyon wrote: > On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:3

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:38 PM, Peter Haworth wrote: > Hi Jacque, > Interesting discussion and just emphasizes how different folks have > different needs for the IDE. > > ​We certainly do have an embarrassment of riches when it comes to project tools ;-)​ _

Re: Death of the Application Browser

Hi Jacque, Interesting discussion and just emphasizes how different folks have different needs for the IDE. I haven't jumped in before but I believe it will do everything you with with the big exception of the "horizontal" layout issue. Here's a few things that I think might help with that. Geoff

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 2:41 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: > re-expanding a navigator covers up the others ​Only if you set them up to cover other Navigators -- it expands back to where it was. On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 2:41 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: > I spent a little time yesterday seeing if I c

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 2:41 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: > remove the showLines ​This should work as well.​ ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferen

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 2:41 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: > (Navigator is a problem for me in that respect, btw.) ​Interesting. It's just a field, so this should work: set the textSize of fld ​"list" of stack "revNavigator" to 14 -- or whatever you like save stack "revNavigator" 14 works nicely f

Re: Death of the Application Browser

Well, in the interests of learning then: On 12/2/2015 12:01 AM, Geoff Canyon wrote: I see a list of stacks/cards on the left. So there could be substantial scrolling to get to the stack/card you're looking for, right? Yes, sometimes. But not as much as in the Project Browser because stacks an

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 6:48 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: > Groups are always expanded in the AB and substacks are always in the stack > list, so you're never more than 3 clicks away from anything. (You can > collapse the substacks, but I don't.) That's the advantage of a column > layout. > I'm only

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 8:00 PM, [-hh] wrote: > I also started to use Geoff C.'s "revNavigator" which I overlooked in the > plugins menu (also other valuable things). Perhaps one should read this > thread before using it, there were many details about it and other tools to > read one can find nowh

Re: Death of the Application Browser

> Jacqueline L.G. wrote: > I'm guessing my needs are unique, and also that the rest of the list is > getting tired of us by now, so I'll taper off. No, certainly no. I learned a lot from this whole discussion and became also an impression of very interesting working styles that I will also try t

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On 12/1/2015 4:37 PM, Geoff Canyon wrote: I'm not sure I understand. If you have two buttons that you want to work with, and the buttons are each three groups deep on separate cards in separate stacks, then if you were looking at button "a" and wanted to look at button "b" wouldn't a column view

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Geoff Canyon wrote: > 1. Navigate to button "a" and bookmark it > 2. Navigate to button "b" and bookmark it > 3. Work with the bookmarks in any way you like. > Also, Navigator can bookmark the mouseControl, so you don't have to "navigate" to anything, really. If y

Re: Death of the Application Browser

I'm not sure I understand. If you have two buttons that you want to work with, and the buttons are each three groups deep on separate cards in separate stacks, then if you were looking at button "a" and wanted to look at button "b" wouldn't a column view require you to: 1. Click on the stack conta

Re: Death of the Application Browser

Yeah, all three of us. ;-) Regards, Scott Rossi Creative Director Tactile Media, UX/UI Design On 12/1/15, 1:24 PM, "use-livecode on behalf of J. Landman Gay" wrote: >You will be everyone's hero. I can't wait. :) > >On 12/1/2015 2:51 PM, Scott Rossi wrote: >> I'm waiting for an LC release t

Re: Death of the Application Browser

You will be everyone's hero. I can't wait. :) On 12/1/2015 2:51 PM, Scott Rossi wrote: I'm waiting for an LC release that has the AB available as a plugin and to look into doing exactly what you suggest. Regards, Scott Rossi Creative Director Tactile Media, UX/UI Design On 12/1/15, 11:49 A

Re: Death of the Application Browser

I'm waiting for an LC release that has the AB available as a plugin and to look into doing exactly what you suggest. Regards, Scott Rossi Creative Director Tactile Media, UX/UI Design On 12/1/15, 11:49 AM, "use-livecode on behalf of J. Landman Gay" wrote: >On 12/1/2015 3:53 AM, Monte Gouldi

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On 12/1/2015 12:53 AM, Geoff Canyon wrote: Navigator doesn't do the Finder column view exactly That's the blocker for me, not just in Navigator but in all the alternate control browsers I've looked at (four so far.) All the alternatives are well written and feature-rich, but they are all use

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On 12/1/2015 3:53 AM, Monte Goulding wrote: > But IDs are imperative when I get an error message like this: > > Hint: field id 12345 of card id 2069 of stack… Failing a proper mobile debugger some way to scroll to an object reference in the project browser would work for this. It probably wou

Re: Death of the Application Browser

> On 1 Dec 2015, at 5:57 pm, J. Landman Gay wrote: > Number-name would work, though it isn't as easy to read as a column. But I'd > be okay with it. Not sure what you mean by "object descriptor" though. I just meant that some folks might like "number. name" and others might like "name (number)

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On 11/30/2015 4:29 PM, Monte Goulding wrote: Thanks Jacque, this is a good list. I deleted a long commentary before I hit Send. :) 2. I need to see card numbers and object layer numbers. Would it be sufficient to have something like . instead of just ? Perhaps there might be a way in pr

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 4:57 PM, Paul Looney wrote: > I personally use Geoff's Navigator all the time. I find it indispensable! > I have never liked the Application Browser. > > I’m always surprised at how few people have even heard of the Navigator - > let alone actually us

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 3:41 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: > 1. Horizontal/column view so it is easy to drill down from stack to card > to object, and see their relationships to everything else. Basically I want > Finder column view. > Navigator doesn't do the Finder column view exactly -- there is

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 12:41 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: > 1. Horizontal/column view so it is easy to drill down from stack to card > to object, and see their relationships to everything else. Basically I want > Finder column view. > 2. I need to see card numbers and object layer numbers. > 3. I n

Re: Death of the Application Browser

Thanks Jacque, this is a good list. > On 1 Dec 2015, at 7:41 am, J. Landman Gay wrote: > > 1. Horizontal/column view so it is easy to drill down from stack to card to > object, and see their relationships to everything else. Basically I want > Finder column view. Yes, I think this would be hel

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On 11/29/2015 12:50 AM, Brahmanathaswami wrote: Jacque: can you detail your requirements that make it a must for your stacks to use the AP? 1. Horizontal/column view so it is easy to drill down from stack to card to object, and see their relationships to everything else. Basically I want Find

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On Nov 26, 2015, at 12:07 , Scott Rossi mailto:sc...@tactilemedia.com>> wrote: I doubt anybody is arguing with you. Well... is. :-) Bob S ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe an

Re: Death of the Application Browser

Having another look at the PB and AP side-by-side this afternoon - apart from one being essentially vertical and the other horizontal it seems the two things missing on the PB are display of control ids and easy sorting by layer, visibility and selectibility - control ids - in the AP these (and pa

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 10:50 PM, Brahmanathaswami wrote: > Jacque: can you detail your requirements that make it a must for your > stacks to use the AP? > I'm not Jacqui, but the biggest single thing for me is the information density: the application browser puts far more on

Re: Death of the Application Browser

I personally use Geoff's Navigator all the time. I find it indispensable! I have never liked the Application Browser. I’m always surprised at how few people have even heard of the Navigator - let alone actually using it - despite the fact that it is bundled with LiveCode. Thanks again,

Re: Death of the Application Browser

The other thing I would add is - if you are going to try out the project browser for goodness sake turn off thumbnails first! Monte Goulding-2 wrote > It really would be better of people enumerated the problems they have with > the new IDE stacks rather than just say use them and see. We all do

Re: Death of the Application Browser

It really would be better of people enumerated the problems they have with the new IDE stacks rather than just say use them and see. We all do things differently and the problems you see might not be the problems I see. Sent from my iPhone > On 29 Nov 2015, at 9:50 pm, [-hh] wrote: > > And he

Re: Death of the Application Browser

Taking it out of the IDE hierarchy should > give us more options to work on the Application Browser. > Since the team wants to do other things, it's up to the > community to fix the AB, and making it a plugin makes it > easier to do so. Reading that one could wish, the LC 7 prop

Re: Death of the Application Browser

Ooops... i replied to an earlier post before reading all the latest discussion. Yeah... I use lcStackbrowser too.. Brahmanathaswami wrote: OK, I'm glad I deferred again from even testing 8+... without the AB I would be lost. But, I really like the visual look-and-feel option of icons and

Re: Death of the Application Browser

OK, I'm glad I deferred again from even testing 8+... without the AB I would be lost. But, I really like the visual look-and-feel option of icons and previews etc in the PB... that said, there are definitely scenarios where you want really lean lists for stacks with many cards, many controls..

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On 27/11/15 16:12, Kevin Miller wrote: Richmond, Real people work at LiveCode. Often they work long hours and are here late into the evenings. We care a great deal about our community. I was out of the office yesterday and returned today to find two team members stressed and demotivated. I enqu

Re: Death of the Application Browser

gt;> Making it a plugin allows it to be more malleable, fixable, >> replaceable. Taking it out of the IDE hierarchy should give us more >> options to work on the Application Browser. Since the team wants to do >> other things, > >Aah, so the team isn't going to bother to l

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On 27/11/15 00:19, Fraser Gordon wrote: On 26/11/15 20:24, Richmond wrote: Aah, so the team isn't going to bother to listen to the Community because it wants to do other things; so it is chucking the Application Browser out to grass. I'm not sure I follow. The application browser i

Re: Death of the Application Browser

Have you tried Navigator? It is a very simple list view, fairly quick, can be made small and collapses down even smaller, and allows for multiple instances so you can see/work with many separate stacks at the same time. I only kinda sorta support it though, so your mileage may vary. The version in

Re: Death of the Application Browser

> On 27 Nov 2015, at 11:58 am, Peter W A Wood wrote: > > Given Mark’s earlier explanation, it is difficult to see how the IDE can be > MIT licensed. I posted the link to the license file in the repo. I don’t think I can do much more than that to prove it ;-) > After all, it is just a stack a

Re: Death of the Application Browser

> On 27 Nov 2015, at 11:11 am, [-hh] wrote: > > I would like to have that project browser does at least the same functional > (working) things as the application browser. While it may seem like there are a lot of people saying this stuff there’s actually only a handful. The pro

Re: Death of the Application Browser

Monte > On 27 Nov 2015, at 06:29, Monte Goulding wrote: > > >> On 27 Nov 2015, at 9:24 am, Peter W A Wood wrote: >> >> Given Mark Waddingham’s recent view of LiveCode stacks and GPL, if the >> Application Browser is hived off to the community anybody using

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On 11/26/2015 02:19 PM, Fraser Gordon wrote: I'd be delighted if someone makes an Application Browser++ Awesome Edition plugin. lcStackBrowser Now if it were only dual-licensed... -- Mark Wieder ahsoftw...@gmail.com ___ use-livecode mailing

Re: Death of the Application Browser

@Monte: > If all they are hearing is a handful of people saying they don’t like it > and want to use the application browser instead then can you blame them > for coming up with a solution of putting the application browser in > plugins for those users? People in this list are sayin

Re: Death of the Application Browser

> On 27 Nov 2015, at 9:24 am, Peter W A Wood wrote: > > Given Mark Waddingham’s recent view of LiveCode stacks and GPL, if the > Application Browser is hived off to the community anybody using it would only > be able to sell it under the GPL. :-) Actually that would appear

Re: Death of the Application Browser

> On 27 Nov 2015, at 04:26, Richmond wrote: > For exactly the same reason why the Application Browser is being hived off to > the "community", > because, while Lip-service is being paid to listening to the community . . . Given Mark Waddingham’s recent view of LiveCode

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On 26/11/15 20:24, Richmond wrote: Aah, so the team isn't going to bother to listen to the Community because it wants to do other things; so it is chucking the Application Browser out to grass. I'm not sure I follow. The application browser isn't going anywhere. If it works

Re: Death of the Application Browser

ituation. If all they are hearing is a handful of people saying they don’t like it and want to use the application browser instead then can you blame them for coming up with a solution of putting the application browser in plugins for those users? Cheers Monte __

Re: Death of the Application Browser

question to ask is why these have been pointed out repeatedly and not acted upon, or at least acknowledged. For exactly the same reason why the Application Browser is being hived off to the "community", because, while Lip-service is being paid to listening to the community . . . R.

Re: Death of the Application Browser

t out of the IDE hierarchy should give us more options to work on the Application Browser. Since the team wants to do other things, Aah, so the team isn't going to bother to listen to the Community because it wants to do other things; so it is chucking the Application Browser out to grass

Re: Death of the Application Browser

> J. LG wrote: > Something like that would work for me ... If such wonderful things could be realized (will be a feature-exchange), what should then the significantly confused crowd of newcomers do? Use the Application browser plugin? ___ use-li

Re: Death of the Application Browser

I doubt anybody is arguing with you. I think most agree that the Project Browser is a great step toward a modern editor. But the capabilities lacking in the Project Browser have been pointed out numerous times -- see the mail archives. Perhaps a better question to ask is why these have been p

Re: Death of the Application Browser

> On 27 Nov 2015, at 7:02 am, Mark Wieder wrote: > > Actually, I don't see that as a downgrade at all. > Making it a plugin allows it to be more malleable, fixable, replaceable. > Taking it out of the IDE hierarchy should give us more options to work on the > Applica

Re: Death of the Application Browser

ve us more options to work on the Application Browser. Since the team wants to do other things, it's up to the community to fix the AB, and making it a plugin makes it easier to do so. -- Mark Wieder ahsoftw...@gmail.com ___ use-livecode mailin

Re: Death of the Application Browser

AND, defensive as you like . . . The "one" about that the Application Browser had been moved into the Plug-ins was nothing but a . . . I wasn't there! Try harder next time . . . Richmond. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@l

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On 26/11/15 21:36, J. Landman Gay wrote: (Finally, I hope I didn't show any claws, though I admit that removing the App Browser would force me to remain in LC 7 indefinitely and I had a moment of despair.) We know that you are really a "pussy cat"; rather like my cats; who are soft and sw

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On 11/26/2015 1:04 PM, Monte Goulding wrote: What I don't really understand is why people aren't offering suggestions on how to improve the project browser so it will work for them. To my mind the simple solution would be to have multiple layout modes (tree, list, column) and the ability to detac

Re: Death of the Application Browser

It's clearly a waste of resources to maintain two things that are intended to provide the same service. Do you do that in your apps? What I don't really understand is why people aren't offering suggestions on how to improve the project browser so it will work for them. To my mind the simple sol

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On 26/11/15 20:31, Mark Waddingham wrote: On 2015-11-26 19:23, Richmond wrote: Application Browser, and that they back-tracked when they realised that people that HAVE to listen to (Ms. Gay) had unsheathed their claws. There was absolutely no back-tracking at all. The PR to move the

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On 2015-11-26 19:23, Richmond wrote: Application Browser, and that they back-tracked when they realised that people that HAVE to listen to (Ms. Gay) had unsheathed their claws. There was absolutely no back-tracking at all. The PR to move the Application Browser to a plugin was done quite a

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On 26/11/15 19:32, Richard Gaskin wrote: Richmond wrote: I've got several buttons, and getting rid of the Application Browser just pushed one of them quite hard. Peter and Ali have already made multiple posts noting that the omission of the App Browser is a bug which will be fixed i

Re: Death of the Application Browser

Richmond wrote: I've got several buttons, and getting rid of the Application Browser just pushed one of them quite hard. Peter and Ali have already made multiple posts noting that the omission of the App Browser is a bug which will be fixed in the next build. One of the benefi

Re: Death of the Application Browser

-native speakers had no trouble at all with the Application Browser. Oh, but that's probably because I'm a qualified and highly experienced teacher who CAN explain things properly. There is nearly no difference if you have one button and one field. I've got several buttons, and

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On 11/26/2015 01:37 AM, Peter TB Brett wrote: Ali has investigated and has found that the Application Browser was missing from the latest *Development Preview* release of LiveCode 8 due to a bug, which is now fixed. Peter, Ali- thanks for that. I'm sure you'll be delighted to hea

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On 26/11/2015 13:33, [-hh] wrote: But do NOT diminish improvements and testing and do NOT cut, as now, one of the most valuable parts from the full version. As I explained, the absence of the Application Browser from the latest Developer Preview release was a bug which will be fixed in the

Re: Death of the Application Browser

on caused by the > presence of both "Project Browser" and "Application Browser" in the > "Tools" menu, which was leading to users trying to follow instructions > and ending up in completely the wrong place. What makes you think that the whole big community ha

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On 26/11/15 04:10, Mark Wieder wrote: On 11/25/2015 01:38 PM, Richmond wrote: On 25/11/15 22:54, Ali Lloyd wrote: It was put into the plugins menu in DP 9. Apologies for the lack of release note to that effect. Then why does it not show up menu/development/plugins ??? Nor in /opt/livecode

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On 25/11/2015 23:13, Mark Schonewille wrote: Does this mean that [the Application Browser] is no longer supported? *Everything* shipped with LiveCode is supported. If we don't intend to support it, we don't ship it. Bearing that in mind: 1) In general, we have found that t

Re: Death of the Application Browser

http://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=16497 On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 9:13 AM Peter TB Brett wrote: > On 26/11/2015 02:10, Mark Wieder wrote: > > On 11/25/2015 01:38 PM, Richmond wrote: > >> On 25/11/15 22:54, Ali Lloyd wrote: > >>> It was put into the plugins menu in DP 9. Apologies for the

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On 26/11/2015 02:10, Mark Wieder wrote: On 11/25/2015 01:38 PM, Richmond wrote: On 25/11/15 22:54, Ali Lloyd wrote: It was put into the plugins menu in DP 9. Apologies for the lack of release note to that effect. Then why does it not show up menu/development/plugins ??? Nor in /opt/liveco

Re: Death of the Application Browser

perty Inspector, > beautiful design, but there are too much things one can NOT do. > > It's twice as fast to quit LC 8, to open LC 7 and do the simplest edit in LC > 7's > Application Browser supported by LC 7's Property inspector. > > For me it's the pair

Re: Death of the Application Browser

ign, but there are too much things one can NOT do. It's twice as fast to quit LC 8, to open LC 7 and do the simplest edit in LC 7's Application Browser supported by LC 7's Property inspector. For me it's the pair (Application Browser, LC 7 - Property Inspector) that is much mor

Re: Death of the Application Browser

It needs to come back. I can't work without it. Project browser is not an acceptable replacement for the kind of stacks I work with. On November 25, 2015 8:19:05 PM CST, Colin Holgate wrote: >Maybe it was there in DP9. Seems not to be there in DP10. > > >> On Nov 25, 2015, at 9:10 PM, Mark Wie

Re: Death of the Application Browser

Maybe it was there in DP9. Seems not to be there in DP10. > On Nov 25, 2015, at 9:10 PM, Mark Wieder wrote: > > On 11/25/2015 01:38 PM, Richmond wrote: >> On 25/11/15 22:54, Ali Lloyd wrote: >>> It was put into the plugins menu in DP 9. Apologies for the lack of >>> release >>> note to that eff

Re: Death of the Application Browser

On 11/25/2015 01:38 PM, Richmond wrote: On 25/11/15 22:54, Ali Lloyd wrote: It was put into the plugins menu in DP 9. Apologies for the lack of release note to that effect. Then why does it not show up menu/development/plugins ??? Nor in /opt/livecode/livecodecommunity-8.0.0-dp-10.x86_64/P

  1   2   >