Yes, it was the mix of code that should have an object scope and code that was fine to have a application wide scope that I was commenting on Matt.
Sent from my iPhone > On 29 Mar 2016, at 2:46 PM, Richard Gaskin <ambassa...@fourthworld.com> wrote: > > Matt Maier wrote: > > > Monte got annoyed that I did something like that instead of setting > > behaviors. So it might be better to write behaviors in script-only > > stacks and then set them onto the various controls, rather than > > managing the controls all the way from the library stack(s). > > Behaviors are good. And so are libraries. They're not mutually exclusive. > > "Nothing is true. Everything is permitted." > > -- > Richard Gaskin > Fourth World Systems > Software Design and Development for Desktop, Mobile, and Web > ____________________________________________________________ > ambassa...@fourthworld.com http://www.FourthWorld.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 _______________________________________________ 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
