Just a side note, that for "parent" behaviors which have been "nested" as the
behavior of multiple "children" ... we are "blinded sided" to this, as the
designation is in the first comment of the script with doesn't appear in the
IDE, SE
The only other place to see it is in the PB in 9+, that is obscure and is shows
a "dot" nothing more.
If you are using text editor, no problem. But I have taken a convention for
every child behavior, to make the first comment on the script declare:
-> ## this script has a parent: behavior_ListenUI
So I can see it in IDE script editor
Coming to the "script local" problem. Jacque was misquoted. She said scripts
that are not attached to an object (there is no "this me"....) globals are
required.
One solution is to use a single global as an array..
Global sConfigA # with keys needed
This doesn’t solve the problem of "who set that value" when tracing; but I
found it convenient to have a single global to check out at any point this I
want to use it. And the keys are like "custom properties" of global array.
Still, if could lead to "untraceable" code if I used that one array for too
much.
Would be nice to solve it somehow. I found myself using a "setter" command
from parent script creating a child local script local. And then a function
to called that back...into parent. Then a few days, later, thinking
"I need that local value in this other child..... geez - this backwards! Parent
has to check "down the message path"?....The parent script wants to have
everything! UhOH! I'm on the edge of snake pit here. Maybe I should not go
down that road?"
So I put plans for all the cool stuff I could do in "parent script" (of other
children which actually have object) aside for now. Mostly use for UI stuff,
like keep a mouseup handler, and if wanted it called from the child, just pass
it in the child
On mouseUp
pass mouseUp
# goes to parent behavior_ListenUI
# because it has to have an object in the UI
# it will *not* be passed in the message path...unless you do this.
End mouseup
BR
"I too am still trying to figure it out"
Bob Sneidar wrote:
I'm getting heavily into behaviors and script only stacks now (in
preparation for Levure Framework) because my project has become complex enough
to make it almost inevitable. I have perhaps 20 or so substacks in a mainstack.
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[email protected]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
