Clearly the complexity you're painfully aware of is nicely hidden from
me by LC script, where I tend to think all things are most likely
possible. It's good for bubble-dwellers like myself to occasionally be
pulled back into reality. I guess. ;-)
Thanks -
Phil
On 9/7/17 3:06 PM, Monte Goulding via use-livecode wrote:
On 8 Sep 2017, at 7:19 am, Phil Davis via use-livecode
<use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
You asked me a similar question on 11-Nov-2016 - here is the back-and-forth.
Sometimes we have our reasons! :-)
Ha… OK back in my box then ;-)
FWIW I would dearly love send in time to remember the caller and if the target
is the caller then allow private handlers. I often have to write long
complicated handler names for things simply because they will be in the message
path and I want to avoid their conflict with other handlers… It’s a little
hairy a proposition when it comes to behaviors as I’m not really sure what
happens if you send to `this me`… you probably don’t get the script locals
related to `me`… would need some testing I guess.
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
--
Phil Davis
_______________________________________________
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
