button's mouseUp default handler

Question

p. 99, end of first paragraph about backgrounds. "If the script of a button is empty, the group won't receive a mouseUp message"

Not exactly true: Buttons are created with an empty mouseUp handler:

on mouseUp

end mouseUp

which actually blocks the message. But if you remove this script and click "apply", or create a new script without a mouseUp handler, the mouseUp message will be passed along the message path normally.

But be careful! if you re-open the script of a button with an empty script, the empty mouseUp handler will be recreated ! To be sure that your button remains functionally "scriptless" (what can be useful in some circumstances) you have either to correct the default script with a "pass mouseUp" statement or to create a dummy scipt like

command doAbsolutelyNothing

end doAbsolutelyNothing

Answer 1

Please test this again and confirm your results.

Comments

Hi Mark,
Yes it works more or less like I wrote (at least with 5.5.4 or 6.0.2 and Mac Lion Mountain).
Minimalist and very rough recipe:
- create a new stack
- put 1 button and 1 field on the card
- group them
- set the script of the group to
      on mouseUp
           put "OK" into fld 1
      end mouseUp
- open the script of the button
- select the default script (empty "on mouseUp") and delete it completely
- immediatly click "Apply"
select the browse tool and click on the button (make the button big enough to be sure to really click inside it).
"OK" appears on the field
- now, open the script of the button again
   the default script will be recreated
click on "Apply"
clear the field, and click on the button again: Nothing. The default script traps the message. But if the button has a script without mouseUp handler, the script is recorded "as it is" and the mouseUp message is passed further away.
OK, contrary to what I said, the default script is not compiled if you don't click on the "apply" button (what I did by reflex) - but then the button is "scriptless" and the message is not stopped.
I don't think one should call it a bug, but actually it should be a little discussion about this default script in the docs.
Jacques

---

Thanks for testing. Apparently, there is a mistake in the text here. It is being investigated.