Ben- Wednesday, September 21, 2011, 7:34:07 AM, you wrote:
> Thanks for replying. I agree with you about not working around an assert - if > it's my code. np - I wasn't sure you knew what an assert statement was - most people wouldn't, thus the longish explanation. > - Clearly there is an operation which reveals a bug in the LC code. There's a disconnect between the -ui switch and operations that require a UI. That's why I suggested piping the output to /dev/nul so as not to clutter up the screen (untested). > - If I knew what the operation was (ie, if anyone else has pinned down an > operation in LC which causes this assertion to be thrown) then I might be able > to avoid using that operation. I don't think it's a big mystery - any sort of a UI operation: go to card x, show field, etc, might well have assertions to make sure the engine isn't going to grobble off the end of the road. I think that's a proper use of assertions, but there should also be a check to make sure that we're not in -ui mode beforehand. -- -Mark mwie...@ahsoftware.net _______________________________________________ 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
