nnoydb at excite.com
Fri Apr 9 12:49:52 CDT 2004
In version 2.2 using the Property Inspector if you select Stack File in the drop down and set a stack file the format of the "stackFiles" property will be what I listed in the previous email.
Any resemblance between the above views and those of my
employer, my terminal, or the view out my window are purely
Any resemblance between the above and my own views is non-deterministic.
The question of the existence of views in the absence of anyone to hold
is left as an exercise for the reader. The question of the existence of
is left as an exercise for the second god coefficient.
(A discussion of non-orthogonal, non-integral polytheism is beyond the
scope of this article.)
--- On Fri 04/09, J. Landman Gay < jacque at hyperactivesw.com > wrote:
From: J. Landman Gay [mailto: jacque at hyperactivesw.com]
To: use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2004 11:41:25 -0500
Subject: Re: stackFiles BUG?
On 4/9/04 7:49 AM, Kevin wrote:<br><br>> <br>> In the current release of Revolution one can set the "stackFiles" property via the Property Inspector the format of entries created is<br>> <br>> <short name>,<long name><return><br>> <br>> this is also true when it is accessed via transcript using <br>> <br>> "get the stackFiles of stack XXXX"<br>> <br>> However, when the stackFiles property is set via transcript one must specify using list format. The entries created are not listed in the property inspector. So any code accessing the stackFiles property must replace return with comma to get a consistant behavior.<br>> <br>> List format <long name>,<long name>,<long name> <br>> <br>> Is this a BUG? <br><br>I'm not sure what you are seeing. I just tried an experiment. I put this <br>into a field:<br><br>dict,components/help/revdictionary.rev<br>doc,components/help/revdocumentation.rev<br>enc,components/help/revencyclopedia.rev<br><br>Then from the message box:<br><br> set the stackfiles of this stack to fld 1<br><br>Then again from the message box:<br><br> answer the stackfiles of this stack<br><br>And what I got back was a return-delimited list exactly as it was in the <br>field. I could just as easily have constructed the original list in a <br>variable without using a field.<br><br>-- <br>Jacqueline Landman Gay | jacque at hyperactivesw.com<br>HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com<br>_______________________________________________<br>use-revolution mailing list<br>use-revolution at lists.runrev.com<br>http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution<br>
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
More information about the use-livecode