> However, there is the new set of drivers that (mainly) Michael Davidsaver at
> BNL is developing. He probably should also take a look to see if and how this
> would affect his implementation (although I think it will be more or less the
> same story - linking hard and soft events.)
Named DB events will cause a small disruption, but the benefit is enough to justify it.
This will only effect me since I am using a longoutRecord instead of an eventRecord. I can't put an eventRecord in an autosave monitor set because it posts the VAL field whenever the event occurs instead of just when the VAL field changes. I could switch to using a stringoutRecord, and restrict 3.14 to strings which can be converted into integers.
> However, there is the new set of drivers that (mainly) Michael Davidsaver at
> BNL is developing. He probably should also take a look to see if and how this
> would affect his implementation (although I think it will be more or less the
> same story - linking hard and soft events.)
Named DB events will cause a small disruption, but the benefit is enough to justify it.
This will only effect me since I am using a longoutRecord instead of an eventRecord. I can't put an eventRecord in an autosave monitor set because it posts the VAL field whenever the event occurs instead of just when the VAL field changes. I could switch to using a stringoutRecord, and restrict 3.14 to strings which can be converted into integers.