Developer Annoyance #1

[Arthur Urban]

The problem with this solution is that varA and varB are not evaluated. 
In order to use your syntax it would need to be:

send "calc" && varA & comma & varB to btn "source"
or
send merge( "calc [[varA]], [[varB]]" ) to btn "source"

I find both inelegant readability wise. I think there is a great burden 
on language developers to create a language that goes as far as it can 
toward self-documentation. I feel that the message passing mechanisms 
are a sore spot in transcript. I do not understand why Rev would be 
unable to parse my proposed syntax.

Thank you for your suggestion, however!

Andre Garzia wrote:
> Err...
>
> can't you make it a Handler use send and check for the result???
>
> send "calc VarA, VarB" to btn "source"
> put the result into localResult
>
> of course calc is not a function but a handler with a return statement.
>
> Cheers
> andre
>
>
>
> On Mar 17, 2006, at 2:55 AM, Jim Ault wrote:
>
>>> I'm not sure that this is the right direction for any language to be
>>> headed. Please explain why we can't have the following syntax:
>>>
>>>   put calc(varA,varB) of btn "source" into localResult
>>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
>
>