Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

:-) > On May 29, 2019, at 08:46 , J. Landman Gay via use-livecode > wrote: > > Read the release notes. You'll get a much better view of the number of bug > fixes in each version. The last one had 2 pages of fixes. > > The team can both walk and chew gum, they're talented that way. > -- > Jacq

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

Richmond wrote: ...I wonder why LiveCode central seem content to churn ever-onwards into the bright, new future without contributing anything visible to rooting out bugs? Visibility requires both observable phenomena, and an engaged observer. As described here and many times before, LiveCode

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

Read the release notes. You'll get a much better view of the number of bug fixes in each version. The last one had 2 pages of fixes. The team can both walk and chew gum, they're talented that way. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactives

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

I'd love to join the regression extermination effort, but I wonder why LiveCode central seem content to churn ever-onwards into the bright, new future without contributing anything visible to rooting out bugs? Sooner rather than later I'm going to have to buy a Commercial licence again . . .

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

Me: >> install the latest build AND an older version Richmond: > That begs a question: which older version? Chewed on this a bit, and I'm going to say LC 6.7 because: A) LC 6.7.x versus latest build is still currently the best overall comparison to find the most regressions. B) We kinda ne

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

Richmond: > So, if one is a dedicated bug-hunter one has to, then, work one's > way back through (potentially) an awful lot of versions of LC to > pin down when that bug started manifesting itself. Only if one is jumping down a rabbit hole! That's a completely different matter, not related to

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

Um . . . spotting bugs. Well, I should like, first of all, to categorise bugs in LiveCode into (at least) 2 types: 1. Those that have been present in LiveCode for yonks and seem to have been overlooked, brushed-aside or forgotten. 2. Recently occurring bugs that: 2.1. Will end up in catego

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

Brian: > Looking at the beginning of the thread, I think what Richard > meant initially is that if everyone always moved to the latest > version (bonus for testing with RC and DP versions) then > regressions would probably be spotted fairly quickly Yes, using the latest LC version is, shall we

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

Looking at the beginning of the thread, I think what Richard meant initially is that if everyone always moved to the latest version (bonus for testing with RC and DP versions) then regressions would probably be spotted fairly quickly since a vast surface area of the engine would be tested at onc

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

Richard: > Two very different scenarios. What you describe is what I often > see Panos and others deliver in the course of resolving reports, > identifying the source of origin of a bug. And now three different scenarios! Not at all what I described. > For us, if we encounter a bug all we nee

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

Curry Kenworthy wrote: > Richard: > > > Testing in older versions is a nice-to-have. > > Testing in the version the team is currently working on > > is a must-have. > > Catchy, but potentially self-defeating. This will catch the most > obvious bugs (and we already have that) but for regression

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

Richard: > Testing in older versions is a nice-to-have. > Testing in the version the team is currently working on > is a must-have. Catchy, but potentially self-defeating. This will catch the most obvious bugs (and we already have that) but for regressions we need comparison, and that involv

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

Curry Kenworthy wrote: > Richard: > > >> This is why I do my daily work in the latest available build, and > >> encourage others to do the same. > > Paul: > > > I completely agree. > > "Latest build" is a nice catchy meme, repeated fairly often but like > many memes very incomplete and therefo

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

On May 16, 2019, at 07:32, Klaus major-k via use-livecode wrote: > ... >> From the dictionary about "anser file ... with type..." >> ... >> If more than one type is specified, a drop-down list containing the tags >> will be displayed allowing the user to select which types of files to >> displa

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

Richard: >> This is why I do my daily work in the latest available build, and >> encourage others to do the same. Paul: > I completely agree. "Latest build" is a nice catchy meme, repeated fairly often but like many memes very incomplete and therefore less effective at results, no matter h

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

On 5/16/2019 7:35 PM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote: Paul Dupuis wrote: > I am sometimes astonished that a bug like this can go undetected > through so many releases. It causes me to worry about the adoption > of LC as a serious commercial application building tool. This is why I do my

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

Paul Dupuis wrote: > I am sometimes astonished that a bug like this can go undetected > through so many releases. It causes me to worry about the adoption > of LC as a serious commercial application building tool. This is why I do my daily work in the latest available build, and encourage other

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

Thank you Monte! I just finished dinner and was sitting down to enter a new bug when I saw you had already done it! On 5/16/2019 6:30 PM, Monte Goulding via use-livecode wrote: On 17 May 2019, at 7:29 am, Monte Goulding via use-livecode wrote: I just added an updated test stack that sh

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

> On 17 May 2019, at 7:29 am, Monte Goulding via use-livecode > wrote: > >> I just added an updated test stack that showed another issue of only a >> single file type is specified. If you have have a chance could you check >> that the fix addresses that use case too? > > I think it would be

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

> On 17 May 2019, at 6:25 am, Paul Dupuis via use-livecode > wrote: > > Thank you Monte! > > I just added an updated test stack that showed another issue of only a single > file type is specified. If you have have a chance could you check that the > fix addresses that use case too? I think

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

On 5/16/19 12:53 PM, Monte Goulding via use-livecode wrote: https://github.com/livecode/livecode/pull/7056 Wow! That was a fast fix! -- Mark Wieder ahsoftw...@gmail.com ___ use-livecode mailing lis

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

Thank you Monte! I just added an updated test stack that showed another issue of only a single file type is specified. If you have have a chance could you check that the fix addresses that use case too? Thanks! On 5/16/2019 3:53 PM, Monte Goulding via use-livecode wrote: https://github.com/

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

https://github.com/livecode/livecode/pull/7056 > On 17 May 2019, at 5:43 am, Monte Goulding via use-livecode > wrote: > > Hi Paul > > I can confirm it is broken. I’ll patch it this morning. If it has been broken > at some point during the refa

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

Hi Paul I can confirm it is broken. I’ll patch it this morning. If it has been broken at some point during the refactor as the blame commit hash is a merge at that time. It’s an easy fix though which is good ;-) Cheers Monte > On 17 May 2019, at 5:26 am, Paul Dupuis via use-livecode > wrote

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

Certainly there is a work around based on extensions. You and I have both written them for Researchware ;-) However, Jeanne used this feature extensively in a bunch of file i/o code she wrote for Researchware for HyperTRANSCRIBE and HyperRESEARCH exports to many formats, which is why/how I disc

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

Paul Dupuis wrote: > I just filed a serious bug for LC904 that is only under OSX. When > using 'asnwer file with type ' the selected type is > supposed to be returned in 'the result'. This works as expected under > Windows, but under OSX using LC904 STABLE, 'the result' is the same as > the 'it'

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

Hi Paul, > Am 16.05.2019 um 16:35 schrieb Paul Dupuis via use-livecode > : > > On 5/16/2019 10:26 AM, Klaus major-k via use-livecode wrote: >> answer file "sdsdds" with type "PNG, JPEG|png,jpg|" > > You only tested with 1 type. Download the test stack from the bug report or > try > answer fil

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

On 5/16/2019 10:32 AM, Klaus major-k via use-livecode wrote: maybe the dictionary should read: "This list is ONLY displayed on Windows systems"? No it is displayed under OSX IF you specify more than one type (tag) not extensions. See my previous reply. Also this fails under LC903 but works a

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

On 5/16/2019 10:26 AM, Klaus major-k via use-livecode wrote: answer file "sdsdds" with type "PNG, JPEG|png,jpg|" You only  tested with 1 type. Download the test stack from the bug report or try answer file "sdsdds" with type ("PNG Files|png"&cr&"JPEG Files|jpg") to actually have more than o

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

... > From the dictionary about "anser file ... with type..." > ... > If more than one type is specified, a drop-down list containing the tags will > be displayed allowing the user to select which types of files to display. > (This list is always displayed on Windows systems). maybe the dictiona

Re: Seeking confirmation of a bug...

Hi Paul, > Am 16.05.2019 um 16:10 schrieb Paul Dupuis via use-livecode > : > > I just filed a serious bug for LC904 that is only under OSX. When using > 'asnwer file with type ' the selected type is supposed to > be returned in 'the result'. This works as expected under Windows, but under >

Seeking confirmation of a bug...

I just filed a serious bug for LC904 that is only under OSX. When using 'asnwer file with type ' the selected type is supposed to be returned in 'the result'. This works as expected under Windows, but under OSX using LC904 STABLE, 'the result' is the same as the 'it', both contain the file pat