Comments on 0.98

[tperry2x]

Hi TerryL
Do you mean something like this?

Screenshot_2024-01-04_22-56-08.gif (272.95 KiB) Viewed 1614 times

You can now specify to have it appear in a variety of ways.
I can make this part of 0.99 when it's ready. Any other suggestions considered as always.

[richmond62]

That's great, as, frankly, I'd far rather a window bar at the top than your grab bar: regardless of the underlying operating system.

[tperry2x]

That's great, as, frankly, I'd far rather a window bar at the top than your grab bar: regardless of the underlying operating system.

Each to their own, but it's about giving everyone a choice.
You can get this via the "check for update" if you are running v0.98. Alternatively, I'll bundle this into 0.99 when it's ready to go. I'm currently looking for achievable tweaks to add to 0.99

How do I (you) know if something is achievable?
Good question - The easiest way is to suggest something. I'll try it and see if it works. All contributions welcome from anyone as well.

[richmond62]

"giving everyone a choice" is all very well up to a point, but Thikke has to work out when the border between reasonable choices and being narly bonkers be!

[tperry2x]

Well, I've asked for any suggestions to go into v0.99 (which might be the last version I create based on the LCC engine), and will let someone take over and release v1.0 after I release v0.99. (unless I go 0.99a, 0.99b or 0.991.... 0.992 etc )

We'll just see what suggestions come in.

[overclockedmind]

Don't knock it: in 1989, when I got my first BBC Master Compact (logically enough from a load of Syrian Druze exiles working for the Bin Harmal construction company in Al Ain, UAE, where I was teaching FORTRAN as a second job), I was bowled over by bitmaps like that.

In fact I started designing a Devanagari-Sanskrit font for the BBC Micro . . . so, nothing much new in terms of doing bonkers things.
-
Monsters.jpg
-
You could replace those tomatoes with OXT icons.

Joking apart, I suppose it would be possible to make a text-only version of xTalk for the Beeb.

I wouldn't knock it in the slightest. I had a VIC-20 at one point and would type in programs from books and magazines. Always nice to find out they made a typo in something that took you hours to re-enter via keyboard, about the time you wanted to save it to a cassette...

[OpenXTalkPaul]

What about a keyboard short cut to centre text?

What shortcut would you like?
(You can't have cmd-shift-c)

I made it command-shift-C in OXT DPE, and changed 'edit card script' to command-option-C, as previously discussed I like-wise changed command-shift-S to "Save As..." and 'edit stack script' to command-option-S

I want to eventually include my styled text editing palette, as well.

[OpenXTalkPaul]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DragonFly_BSD is pretty good; and MetaCard was originally developed for UNIX.

https://www.freebsd.org/

I'm super-fond of 'helloSystem' (by the guy who invented AppImages) the work-in-progress OS that''s built on top of FreeBSD but with custom UI that looks and feels a helluva lot like macOS Snow Leopard with hints of Linux UI.
Unfortunately I couldn't get my OXT Linux AppImage to run in it's Ubuntu compatibility layer.

I read that MetaCard could run on like Sun and HP Unix machines back in the 1990s, I would like to have those binaries to try out (just for the hell of it) in a VM.

I recently acquired a copy of HyperNeXT, but have no Idea how to run it (there's an NeXT emulator called Previous).

[tperry2x]

What about a keyboard short cut to centre text?

What shortcut would you like?
(You can't have cmd-shift-c)

I made it command-shift-C in OXT DPE, and changed 'edit card script' to command-option-C, as previously discussed I like-wise changed command-shift-S to "Save As..." and 'edit stack script' to command-option-S

I want to eventually include my styled text editing palette, as well.

Going through the documentation, here's a list of shortcuts spoken-for. I didn't know ctrl-shift-= was equalise height of selected objects (and it actually works). Does this conflict with your text scaling shortcut used in OXT RCx Paul?

Screenshot 2024-01-06 at 07-12-22 Guides.png (334.81 KiB) Viewed 1570 times

[richmond62]

v0.99 (which might be the last version I create based on the LCC engine)

You are now suffering from the same "slight aberration" that Paul is . . .

When "That person in Edinburgh" made his extremely tactless announcement (although, having seen how he operates, both virtually, and in the flesh, I was not totally surprised in HOW he did it: I was surprised in that he did it: as my Granny from Dundee would have put it, "As much couth as a cow.") about 2 and a bit years ago, a few people began making noises about a continuation open source version, and there was no mention of a lot of (frankly) cruft that has actually served to slow down the realisation of this subsequently.

A version 1.0 that is 99% solid (ever heard of 100% solid software?) would be what was initially discussed, running with the current engines.

Yes, we all know that with the likes of Tim Cook, and to a lesser extent Tamas Nadella (err, sorry, "Satya"), we are running towards an ever-retreating finishing line: and with the advent of Mac silicon that has become vaguely pressing (and I use the word "vaguely" deliberately), and in an ideal world (which we do not inhabit) we'd have an OXT that ran on Haiku OS, Morphos, RISC 5, and "Uncle Charlie's Personal Seriously Wonky OS".

Of course the engines are 'frozen': they are what was inherited from LiveCode: and until a clever, clever person with the will, the time, the inclination, and a semi-decent income that is not dependent on their actual work comes along, or "Uncle Kev" suddenly seeing some screwy light from the East and lobbing us a Mac Silicon engine that we can integrate into what we have; that's what we've got.

As schools world-wide, for largely historical and budget considerations, run computers running various versions of Windows, about 80% (random figure pulled from the back of my head) of home users run Windows, a very large number of developers use either Windows or Linux unless they are specifically developing for Macintosh, while it would be all very jolly indeed to have a Mac Silicon engine, this really should not be anywhere near the top of anyone's shopping list.

I don't see Paris Hilton doing any software development anytime soon: or any of the other fashionistas who 'sport' Macs under their oxters like those disgusting little' yappy dogs.
-

Paris-Hilton-Out-And-About-For-Talking-On-Her-Cell-Phone-And-Carrying-Her-Dog-Tinkerbell-On-The-Street-Los-Angeles_db7c2d57-ad1e-4fae-a421-0a8d26f04faf_1.8a001b7d8b2167ddac8c38f102ed2401.jpeg (39.96 KiB) Viewed 1561 times

-
The recent stuff about using other engines to run OXT on is just ANOTHER distraction that detracts from getting a version of OXT "out" that, while possibly not being any better than LC 963 (why does it need to be?), can serve as a jumping-off platform for any future development: or, can "just sit there" as a way for developers and end-users to have something that is not connected to LiveCode (the company) to develop whatever they wish with.

At that point (and NOT until that point) we can start advertising the thing (something that seems to have been overlooked, and raises the possibility that OXT could turn into a coterie fetish between 2 members of a duopoly) and TRYING to attract users.

How the FF (Flying Fudge) am I going to write some article for an educators' magazine that has a half-cock beta version at the end of it (and, frankly if you want to call 0.99 1.0 instead that would be enough to make the difference)?

If people hereabouts really care about the LC Open Source thing and keeping it afloat then all efforts should be devoted to pushing out a usable, easily installable version AND promoting the thing like buggery!

[richmond62]

I have just run a "Check for Updates" with 0.98 and the thing downloaded 2 files (MacOS 12) . . .

I wonder . . .

Well, it ran; but as there was NO documentation as to what it may have implemented . . .

[richmond62]

Oh, it did do something which is "problematic":
-

Screenshot 2024-01-06 at 11.31.25.png (66.26 KiB) Viewed 1559 times

-
On opening OXT Lite 0.98 'things' look all right: but, as soon as one clicks on the menuBar it is moved to its top is set to 0,
so hides behind the MacOS Menu.

Fiddling around in the Preferences palette can not sort this problem out.

[tperry2x]

Oh yeah, that's because the mac measures the top of the screen as actually 23px down (because of the menu bar). Forgot about that crap.

I will sort that with an update. (this is like being Microsoft: an update to fix an update)

Edit: done. Sorry about that.

Screenshot 2024-01-06 at 11.34.51.png (189.83 KiB) Viewed 1550 times

mac-fix-2.png (160.63 KiB) Viewed 1545 times

Regarding your other point you mentioned:

I have just run a "Check for Updates" ... there was NO documentation as to what it may have implemented . . .

It'll tell you what files were changed:

Screenshot at 2024-01-06 11-37-53.png (24.91 KiB) Viewed 1550 times

But, do you mean adding a description that says something like "Made special allowances for MacOS so that the position of the revMenubar window is positioned correctly. This does not affect Windows or Linux".

[richmond62]

But, do you mean adding a description that says something like "Made special allowances for MacOS so that the position of the revMenubar window is positioned correctly. This does not affect Windows or Linux".

Not necessarily a bad thing . . .

Irrelevant bit:

"All the cigarettes in this world are stale." Philip K. Dick.

[tperry2x]

"All the cigarettes in this world are stale." Philip K. Dick.

Probably their tastebuds, or is that the joke?

[tperry2x]

On a relevant note, as I say - you can expect 0.99 probably by the end of this month, then I'll hand it over to someone to continue with it further.

[richmond62]

On a relevant note, as I say - you can expect 0.99 probably by the end of this month, then I'll hand it over to someone to continue with it further.

On a relevant note: I'd be grateful if you'd give my 'Paris Hilton' post above due consideration before . . .

[richmond62]

Thank you, But . . .

On a bitchy note, the revMenubar on MacOS would be better 6 points lower down:
-

Screenshot 2024-01-06 at 15.37.56.png (77.71 KiB) Viewed 1534 times

-

Screenshot 2024-01-06 at 15.40.26.png (302.61 KiB) Viewed 1533 times

-

Screenshot 2024-01-06 at 15.42.13.png (114.65 KiB) Viewed 1532 times

-
Bloody silly, I left the result out: 51.

[richmond62]

Inspired by a post on "that other forum" I thought I'd check something out in the OXT Dictionary:
-

Screenshot 2024-01-06 at 16.59.07.png (131.02 KiB) Viewed 1528 times

-

Screenshot 2024-01-06 at 17.06.48.png (118.4 KiB) Viewed 1526 times

[overclockedmind]

v0.99 (which might be the last version I create based on the LCC engine)

You are now suffering from the same "slight aberration" that Paul is . . .

When "That person in Edinburgh" made his extremely tactless announcement (although, having seen how he operates, both virtually, and in the flesh, I was not totally surprised in HOW he did it: I was surprised in that he did it: as my Granny from Dundee would have put it, "As much couth as a cow.") about 2 and a bit years ago, a few people began making noises about a continuation open source version, and there was no mention of a lot of (frankly) cruft that has actually served to slow down the realisation of this subsequently.

A version 1.0 that is 99% solid (ever heard of 100% solid software?) would be what was initially discussed, running with the current engines.

Yes, we all know that with the likes of Tim Cook, and to a lesser extent Tamas Nadella (err, sorry, "Satya"), we are running towards an ever-retreating finishing line: and with the advent of Mac silicon that has become vaguely pressing (and I use the word "vaguely" deliberately), and in an ideal world (which we do not inhabit) we'd have an OXT that ran on Haiku OS, Morphos, RISC 5, and "Uncle Charlie's Personal Seriously Wonky OS".

Of course the engines are 'frozen': they are what was inherited from LiveCode: and until a clever, clever person with the will, the time, the inclination, and a semi-decent income that is not dependent on their actual work comes along, or "Uncle Kev" suddenly seeing some screwy light from the East and lobbing us a Mac Silicon engine that we can integrate into what we have; that's what we've got.

As schools world-wide, for largely historical and budget considerations, run computers running various versions of Windows, about 80% (random figure pulled from the back of my head) of home users run Windows, a very large number of developers use either Windows or Linux unless they are specifically developing for Macintosh, while it would be all very jolly indeed to have a Mac Silicon engine, this really should not be anywhere near the top of anyone's shopping list.

I don't see Paris Hilton doing any software development anytime soon: or any of the other fashionistas who 'sport' Macs under their oxters like those disgusting little' yappy dogs.
-
Paris-Hilton-Out-And-About-For-Talking-On-Her-Cell-Phone-And-Carrying-Her-Dog-Tinkerbell-On-The-Street-Los-Angeles_db7c2d57-ad1e-4fae-a421-0a8d26f04faf_1.8a001b7d8b2167ddac8c38f102ed2401.jpeg
-
The recent stuff about using other engines to run OXT on is just ANOTHER distraction that detracts from getting a version of OXT "out" that, while possibly not being any better than LC 963 (why does it need to be?), can serve as a jumping-off platform for any future development: or, can "just sit there" as a way for developers and end-users to have something that is not connected to LiveCode (the company) to develop whatever they wish with.

At that point (and NOT until that point) we can start advertising the thing (something that seems to have been overlooked, and raises the possibility that OXT could turn into a coterie fetish between 2 members of a duopoly) and TRYING to attract users.

How the FF (Flying Fudge) am I going to write some article for an educators' magazine that has a half-cock beta version at the end of it (and, frankly if you want to call 0.99 1.0 instead that would be enough to make the difference)?

If people hereabouts really care about the LC Open Source thing and keeping it afloat then all efforts should be devoted to pushing out a usable, easily installable version AND promoting the thing like buggery!

So, I just woke up. I did a pre-signing inspection of our new place an hour from here two days ago, the signing yesterday, and when my wife got part of the way here, something happened with a brake caliper and her car is down. And we move the 20th of this month. Frickin' lovely. This last move will not go down without a fight.

--

To counter:
"Yes, 'sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. But sometimes it's a big (two words I'm not using here') -- George Carlin

What are we saying? Put Apple Silicon on indefinite hold in order to progress? Or because it's flat-out in our way?

Is this the "slight aberration" being referred to?

IMO, Windows, and Linux should be our focus points, perhaps a side of UNIX. If the Apple version of UNIX has to take a long walk, well, that is "We Did it Rite" to me.

Apple's need to solder sh*t to a motherboard that doesn't need to be has gotten more annoying over time, that's just one aspect of it, and even though their market share is probably the best it's ever been, what is it, really?

Because I've grown to hate them. Sorry, I have. It started when Steve left us. We've got to come up with... lemme see if I get this... laws to ALLOW us to repair the computer we bought and we paid for? What fresh hell is this?



Anyway, that's my two cents. Maybe I've got it all wrong and I should have waited half an hour to post.