Developer Annoyance #1

[Geoff Canyon]

Not that I disagree with your syntax suggestion -- it looks good to  
me. But:

To avoid the problem stated below, change Jacque's code to:

   insert script of btn "source" into front
   put calc(varA,varB) into localResult
   remove script of btn "source" from front

That way nothing else can intercept the message.

I just posted in another thread an article I wrote on functions:

http://inspiredlogic.com/articles/functions.html

If your functions are written without side effects (they should be)  
then functions can be at whatever level of the message hierarchy they  
need to be, so the issue of how to call them becomes moot -- move  
them to the script of the mainstack if need be.

regards

Geoff


On Mar 17, 2006, at 12:17 AM, Arthur Urban wrote:

> Yeah, thought about that too, but I'm tired of accommodating  
> transcript's ideosyncracies. A language should accommodate the  
> developer at every turn. The problem I see with the solution below,  
> is that if any layer in the message path has an identically named  
> function, the one I want invoked will be intercepted early, and  
> screen the one I actually want. It also kinda obviates the entire  
> strategy of invoking a method in another object. :)
>
> You probably already considered these side-effects, but I spelled  
> them out for anybody else following along, trying to learn this  
> language.
>
> J. Landman Gay wrote:
>>
>> Or there's a really ugly way too, but it's short:
>>
>>   insert script of btn "source" into back
>>   put calc(varA,varB) into localResult
>>   remove script of btn "source" from back
>>
>> I know, I know...but it works.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>