Ben Rubinstein wrote:
> Currently if I understand it correctly there are issues which seem
> just too hard to fix: so instead
> http://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=143 - the most egregious
> of these issues - was 'fixed' by adding the check that Richard's
> trying to remove.
In all fairness, I'm not *trying* to remove it, but have in fact removed
it - in my own copy of the IDE.
As I noted in this post, I've not closed #1061 because I recognize that
the IDE has different responsibilities beyond those of our own apps:
http://lists.runrev.com/pipermail/use-livecode/2016-November/232451.html
I'm just glad to find that the rule for looking up stacks by name built
into the engine is simple, understandable, and very useful.
We can have confidence that our standalones, which don't include
IDE-specific code, will allow stacks of the same name to run without
issue according to a fairly simple search rule.
This means that I can have a classroom of students sharing stacks
without having to impose all sorts of complicated schemes to ensure that
stack names are unique.
For standalones, the engine behavior is beautifully elegant.
But I do recognize that the IDE has a special role with special
responsibilities, and have left my original enhancement request open as
we explore ways to address that, hopefully arriving at a middle ground
which provides confidence about which stack we're working on while also
giving us the freedom to use stacks as easily as the engine allows.
--
Richard Gaskin
Fourth World Systems
Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the 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
