[futurebasic] Re: [FB] SETSELECT 0,32767 not selecting EF contents

Message: < previous - next > : Reply : Subscribe : Cleanse
Home   : January 2009 : Group Archive : Group : All Groups

From: "Pierre Zippi" <pierrezippi@...>
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 13:06:15 -0600
Thanks.
That should have been phrased, "Yes, <in this particular case> I wish
for a non-standard response to clicks". I was just responding to
Robert's previous question. I understand that FB4 "is what it is" and
that's all it's ever going to be.
It is a big job for me to get my apps from FB2 to FB4. I have
determined that it is too big of a job to try to go directly from FB2
to FB5. Again, I'm a full-time biostratigraphy consultant/scientist
(applied paleontology) and a part-time programmer - just the sort of
person who has traditionally gravitated toward BASIC.
Once again, I greatly appreciate the help that you and others on the
list provide. Without that help, I would have not been able to get
past many barriers on my own.

On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Brian Stevens <bstevens33@...> wrote:
>
> On Jan 11, 2009, at 9:29 AM, Pierre Zippi wrote:
>
> Yes, I wish for a non-standard response to clicks.
>
> Hi Pierre,
> FB4 and its runtime are not being updated ( see:
> <http://4toc.com/fb/FB_current_status.html> ), so don't hold your breathe
> waiting for someone to change the FB4 runtime.
> If a supported runtime is required, my suggestion is to go directly to FB5
> if possible. Even if the FBtoC team had the time/resources ( which we don't
>  ---- between FBtoC, documentation and a new editor, we have more than
> enough to do ), it makes no sense to maintain FB4.
>
> I have been able to achieve the desired effect by placing the
> SETSELECT 0,32767 outside of the select/case structure at the end of
> the dialog handler.
>
> Is there any unforeseen problem with this placement?
>
> The only potential problems would most likely be visual. SetSelect does
> exactly what it advertises and no more. As Robert pointed out, runtime
> timing is an issue but you have worked around that.
>  In general, using FB4 poses the obvious problem of not generating a native
> application for Intel Macs. The upcoming ( this year ) release of OS X 10.6
> will make Rosetta optional ( which means PowerPC apps won't run if users
> elect that install(?) option )
> Brian S.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: futurebasic-unsubscribe@...
>
>



-- 
P. Zippi
Using FB 4.4.3 (moving FB2 code to FB4.4.3)