Thanks for the thought Bob. I'm such a Mac person that I neglected to think of that; also, as part of that myopia I dislike having the menus on the Window's real-estate. Apple got it right. M$ did not. IMHO!
Joe Wilkins On Nov 29, 2010, at 3:17 PM, Bob Sneidar wrote: > I have thought for a long time that Menus in Rev/LiveCode should actually be > a special kind of object unto themselves, not a group of objects set as a > background. However, consider Windows, where menus are a part of the window > itself, and you will begin to see why it almost has to work this way. > > Bob > > > On Nov 26, 2010, at 4:54 AM, Robert Brenstein wrote: > >> On 25.11.2010 at 21:25 Uhr -0800 Joe Lewis Wilkins apparently wrote: >>> Thanks Jacqi. It's been ages since I've worked with HC, but I question that >>> menus would have been in backgrounds. They would have been in stack scripts >>> the majority of the time. I think; although I can see how implementing >>> menus from background scripts might have been on some use. >>> >>> BTW, I'm not eager to argue the point. (smile) >>> >>> Joe Wilkins >> >> In HC, menus were not part of the card, so that was not an issue. In >> MC/Rev/LC, menus are implemented as a group of buttons, and as such, that >> group is on a card being copied, whence it, the group, is copied with the >> card. This is what Jacque meant. It may be confusing, particularly if the >> destination stack has its own menu group, but it is expected behavior. >> >> As it was suggested, you just need to manually delete the menu group that >> was carried over and replace it with the one in the destination stack. Only >> you know what is correct. If you do the transfer by script, you can also >> script the deletion and placing of the correct menu group. >> >> Robert _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
