really?..... wait 0 with messages makes some sense .... but if we could retain responsiveness on long repeat loops without it ..then i am all game..... i guess i will search the bug repository. thanks for this ... important timing for me as i am optimizing some of my long and crutial handlers..
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 11:20 AM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > A moment ago I had written: > > The need to use "wait 9 with messages" was recognized as a bug > > Of course that was a typo; s/b: > > The need to use "wait 0 with messages" was recognized as a bug > > -- > 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 > _______________________________________________ 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
