• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Tell Blocks Considered Harmful (was Re: open for access)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Tell Blocks Considered Harmful (was Re: open for access)


  • Subject: Re: Tell Blocks Considered Harmful (was Re: open for access)
  • From: Philip Aker <email@hidden>
  • Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2008 02:06:22 -0800

On 2008-12-16, at 19:17:57, Chris Page wrote:

[…]

All I'm talking about is preventing the user from clicking in Target while the script is waiting for the user to enter the name for dd#1 (and then again later, while waiting for the user to enter the page size for dd#2).

Ok, but what about the implications of the modality of display dialog (et. al.). Continuing with Sender, Target, and Interloper applications notion, if Interloper sent Accessibility events or CGEvents to Target while Sender was running a script involving Target, then if display dialog was window modal, then Interloper could conceivably alter some aspects of Target upon which Sender relies on being stable while it runs a script. My impression is still that the majority of respondents would not like to encounter the realization of what Interloper could potentially do. I wouldn't be opposed to having a choice of modality for StandardAdditions dialogs though. At least I'd fell like I had some control.


Philip Aker
echo email@hidden@nl | tr a-z@. p-za-o.@

Democracy: Two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch.

_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
AppleScript-Users mailing list      (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
Archives: http://lists.apple.com/archives/applescript-users

This email sent to email@hidden
References: 
 >Re: Tell Blocks Considered Harmful (was Re: open for access) (From: Shane Stanley <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Tell Blocks Considered Harmful (was Re: open for access) (From: Chris Page <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Tell Blocks Considered Harmful (was Re: open for access) (From: Philip Aker <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Tell Blocks Considered Harmful (was Re: open for access) (From: Chris Page <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Tell Blocks Considered Harmful (was Re: open for access) (From: Philip Aker <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Tell Blocks Considered Harmful (was Re: open for access) (From: Chris Page <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Tell Blocks Considered Harmful (was Re: open for access) (From: Philip Aker <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Tell Blocks Considered Harmful (was Re: open for access) (From: Chris Page <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Tell Blocks Considered Harmful (was Re: open for access) (From: Philip Aker <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Tell Blocks Considered Harmful (was Re: open for access) (From: Chris Page <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Tell Blocks Considered Harmful (was Re: open for access) (From: Philip Aker <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Tell Blocks Considered Harmful (was Re: open for access) (From: Chris Page <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Standard Additions documentation
  • Next by Date: Re: libraries vs copy/paste (was: on neophytes vs perfectionists)
  • Previous by thread: Re: Tell Blocks Considered Harmful (was Re: open for access)
  • Next by thread: Re: Tell Blocks Considered Harmful (was Re: open for access)
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread