Mark Waddingham wrote:
> Okay so the thread from which this post came has some glaringly large
> and obvious incorrect statements in it so I think it wise I correct
> them.
Great post. Thanks.
My apologies if anything I wrote was construed as misrepresenting your
opinion. Not my intention. P
That sounds like the best approach.
Whilst it might seem 'annoying' to not use code in download files, I think
LiveCode still makes it easier to not have to.
It is just that you have to work a little bit harder to separate content from
code - and parameterise the parts (using data) which you mi
Mark, thanks for the thorough explanation.
I would go on record to say that "vision" for our use of such post/sideloading
option would fall well within th UI/UX of the existing app, since, from a
design point of view our goals would want it to be virtually transparent.
That said, the CMS can g
On 2017-08-11 18:00, Mike Kerner via use-livecode wrote:
That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is while telling everyone
to
control themselves is good, removing these capabilities from LC is bad,
so
if the time comes where it is necessary to do something to stop someone
from behaving bad
That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is while telling everyone to
control themselves is good, removing these capabilities from LC is bad, so
if the time comes where it is necessary to do something to stop someone
from behaving badly, please make sure we have a switch in place that allows
th
On 2017-08-11 16:35, Mike Kerner via use-livecode wrote:
Unless I read your post incorrectly, mark, "Do" works just fine, at
least
Yes it does - the point I was making was that breaking the rules in the
App Store could end up with us having to restrict what the LiveCode
engine can do when bei
Unless I read your post incorrectly, mark, "Do" works just fine, at least
for ad hoc apps, as well it better, because it is a critically important
part of trying to debug mobile apps at runtime, with some of the rather
annoying things that happen at runtime, like some failure in a script
causing th
oodfellows... At least, that's how I feel.
>>>
>>> Ralph DiMola
>>> IT Director
>>> Evergreen Information Services
>>> rdim...@evergreeninfo.net
>>>
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: use-l
ninfo.net
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-
> > From: use-livecode [mailto:use-livecode-boun...@lists.runrev.com] On
> Behalf
> > Of Mark Waddingham via use-livecode
> > Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 7:24 AM
> > To: How to use LiveCode
> > C
at's how I feel.
>
> Ralph DiMola
> IT Director
> Evergreen Information Services
> rdim...@evergreeninfo.net
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: use-livecode [mailto:use-livecode-boun...@lists.runrev.com] On Behalf
> Of Mark Waddingham via use-livecode
> Sent
Original Message-
From: use-livecode [mailto:use-livecode-boun...@lists.runrev.com] On Behalf
Of Mark Waddingham via use-livecode
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 7:24 AM
To: How to use LiveCode
Cc: Mark Waddingham
Subject: Re: Mobile LC Apps Downloading Stacks After installation
On 2017-08-11 12:20
On 2017-08-11 12:20, Jonathan Lynch via use-livecode wrote:
I know the reviewers at app stores are not always careful, but
something like an LC player would surely get their notice.
Review, from my understanding, is heavily automated (it has to be - if
you think of the scale of the App Stores
Thank you, Mark.
This was a great explanation.
I know the reviewers at app stores are not always careful, but something like
an LC player would surely get their notice.
They do allow us to import JS, but JS is way more sandboxed than LC.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 11, 2017, at 3:55 AM, Mar
Okay so the thread from which this post came has some glaringly large
and obvious incorrect statements in it so I think it wise I correct
them.
First of all being able to submit apps to the App Stores which exist
today is critically important to our ecosystem - those App Stores come
with rule
14 matches
Mail list logo
