cross-stack globals, also, file inclusion

[Rob Cozens]

>Although "incorporate any changes in myConstantList.txt at runtime" 
>maybe too much to hope for- would the script have to recompile 
>whenever the file is changed?

Hi again, Alex.

Since I don't fully understand how Revolution's interpreter/compiler 
work,I'm inclined to agree with you.  Probably the best one could 
hope for is to have  changes in the "constant list" incorporated when 
the script is applied; however this falls FAR short of the utility of 
include syntax as I know it from other programming languages.

>I use custom properties as a form of global constants. I think Ken is
>correct about the include stuff...just create a custom lib stack and "start
>using" it.

Hi Chipp,

That's all well and good for sharing handler logic, images, and resources; but

	constant myConstant = myValue

in a library stack script will NOT resolve references to myConstant 
in handlers in stacks that start using the library.

>  I'm afraid I don't see any need for global
>  constants when we've got custom properties that can do essentially the
>  same thing.

Hi Jacque,

Do you really see custom properties as the preferred means of 
declaring constants?  Suppose pi was not a built-in constant.  Would 
you "get the piConstant of this stack" for every stack that used pi? 
Would you "get the piConstant of stack constantLibrary" or "get line 
piConstantLine of the constantList of stack constantLibrary" (with 
piConstantLine being another constant)?

If one must "set the piConstant of this stack to 
3.14159265358979323846", what's the advantage over "constant 
piConstant = 3.14159265358979323846" in the stack script?
-- 

Rob Cozens
CCW, Serendipity Software Company
http://www.oenolog.net/who.htm

"And I, which was two fooles, do so grow three;
Who are a little wise, the best fooles bee."

from "The Triple Foole" by John Donne (1572-1631)