> On 10 Sep 2017, at 1:16 pm, Mark Wieder via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
>> FWIW I would dearly love send in time to remember the caller and if the
>> target is the caller then allow private handlers.
>
> That. Very that.
> Also private callbacks for socket messages.
Socket callbacks are basica
On 09/07/2017 03:06 PM, Monte Goulding via use-livecode wrote:
FWIW I would dearly love send in time to remember the caller and if the target
is the caller then allow private handlers.
That. Very that.
Also private callbacks for socket messages.
--
Mark Wieder
ahsoftw...@gmail.com
___
> On Sep 8, 2017, at 08:04 , Bob Sneidar via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> Looks like others have answered your question in my stead. :-) I will give
> you a good use case.
I will add this too. It would be great if a behavior had access to the local
script's constants as well. This is how I m
Looks like others have answered your question in my stead. :-) I will give you
a good use case.
I have a series of buttons on various cards/substacks that all do almost the
exact same thing: Query for data, populate the card, create delete edit data,
etc. This makes them prime candidates for b
> On 8 Sep 2017, at 8:49 am, Phil Davis via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> Clearly the complexity you're painfully aware of is nicely hidden from me by
> LC script, where I tend to think all things are most likely possible. It's
> good for bubble-dwellers like myself to occasionally be pulled back
Clearly the complexity you're painfully aware of is nicely hidden from
me by LC script, where I tend to think all things are most likely
possible. It's good for bubble-dwellers like myself to occasionally be
pulled back into reality. I guess. ;-)
Thanks -
Phil
On 9/7/17 3:06 PM, Monte Gouldi
> On 8 Sep 2017, at 7:19 am, Phil Davis via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> You asked me a similar question on 11-Nov-2016 - here is the back-and-forth.
> Sometimes we have our reasons! :-)
Ha… OK back in my box then ;-)
FWIW I would dearly love send in time to remember the caller and if the targe
Make that 8-Nov-2016.
Phil
On 9/7/17 2:19 PM, Phil Davis wrote:
You asked me a similar question on 11-Nov-2016 - here is the
back-and-forth. Sometimes we have our reasons! :-)
--
Phil Davis
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.co
On 9/7/17 2:01 PM, Monte Goulding via use-livecode wrote:
On 8 Sep 2017, at 3:57 am, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode
wrote:
Here's a surprise! You cannot dispatch to a private command or function, EVEN
THOUGH the private command or function is in the SAME SCRIPT!
Nor can you send in time… howe
> On 8 Sep 2017, at 3:57 am, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> Here's a surprise! You cannot dispatch to a private command or function, EVEN
> THOUGH the private command or function is in the SAME SCRIPT!
Nor can you send in time… however why do you want to dispatch to the same
scrip
Here's a surprise! You cannot dispatch to a private command or function, EVEN
THOUGH the private command or function is in the SAME SCRIPT! And since
dispatch fails SILENTLY. I *almost* introduced a but where my passwords no
longer encrypted/decrypted in transit to my database!
Bob S <---
11 matches
Mail list logo
