Speed differences between MC and Rev

[Ken Ray]

On 9/24/06 12:16 AM, "J. Landman Gay" <jacque at hyperactivesw.com> wrote:

> Rob wrote:
> They are needed for any stack that uses the rev-based commands that are
> listed in the Rev dictionary. There are so many users who do call those
> handlers that I think it makes sense to embed that library as a standard
> extension. Tech support would collapse under the volume of complaints if
> it weren't in there; users would assume that Rev's standalones were
> broken. Now that I think about it, quietly embedding a library that
> doesn't get in the way of anything is a pretty good decision for
> supporting ease of use, especially for novice users who may not
> understand what libraries do or why they need them.

Well, I'd agree with you if the Standalone Builder didn't have the default
radio button action under Inclusions state "Search for required inclusions
when saving the standalone application". This gives the impression that a
search is being made... which is of course accurate, since when I built my
first version to test this, it output two backscripts (revCommon and
revLibURL) because I'd used "url" in my button. When I removed the "url"
from my button, it didn't include revLibURL.

Personally it doesn't bother me that revCommon is included; I think that it
should be mentioned in the Standalone Builder somewhere (like a footnote or
something). If not, then the other approach would be for the Standalone
Builder to actually search for inclusions of revCommon handlers and
functions.

Either way works for me...

Ken Ray
Sons of Thunder Software
Web site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/
Email: kray at sonsothunder.com