Jacqueline:
> It's not a bug, it was intentionally introduced to allow a couple
> of features, like retaining script local variables after a build.
> Given the amount of extra scripting to work around it for existing
> stacks, I think it may have introduced more problems than it tried
> to cure.
Agreed! I was too busy the other day but wanted to chime in:
This was a baffling case of doubling-down on a wonky and toxic "fix."
The problems introduced were far more numerous than those "fixed."
I pointed this out right away, but it seems that hubris prevailed.
LC Ltd needs a more consistent vision of what LC is and how it works.
Result: workarounds are often needed for standard builds.
In what RAD paradigm should users have to workaround the IDE?
If that's a question we're even needing to ask, we may be in trouble.
(My own stack design usually makes this a moot point. I wasn't affected.
But I saw the expense and pain this caused, plus a troubling precedent.)
So ... isn't it great they teach everyone to double down these days? :)
Turning off messages - good tactic, although it won't work for everyone.
Back to work, take care all....
Best wishes,
Curry Kenworthy
Custom Software Development
"Better Methods, Better Results"
LiveCode Training and Consulting
http://livecodeconsulting.com/
_______________________________________________
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
