> On 7 Nov. 2016, at 3:23 am, Mark Wieder <ahsoftw...@sonic.net> wrote: > > But... > shouldn't that be the big advantage of script-only stacks?
I think this would be relatively handy for trivial stacks but have issues for more complicated ones. Also consider why should this only be the case for script only stacks? If I git checkout and I have a binary stack diff shouldn’t that stack reload too? After all there could be dependencies between the script only stacks and the binary one (they could be its behaviors or something). This introduces some interesting initialisation issues. What if the initialisation is the thing that changed? What if script local values are not appropriate for the new version? What if there’s some self generating UI that isn’t there because only the script was updated. What if I’m mid merge or rebase and there’s conflict markers in the file so it doesn’t compile? I guess it’s possibly OK to have a go updating and the user can restart if they need but I’m not overly sure it’s a good idea. Cheers Monte _______________________________________________ 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
