Equivalence to the SuperCard function call "via" object

[Chipp Walters]

Joël,

Check out the CALL and the VALUE commands. I believe CALL may do what you're
describing.

-Chipp

> -----Original Message-----
> From: use-revolution-admin at lists.runrev.com
> [mailto:use-revolution-admin at lists.runrev.com]On Behalf Of Joël Guillod
> Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 12:00 PM
> To: use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Subject: Re: Equivalence to the SuperCard function call "via" object
>
>
> I am trying to do what Supercard do with the function...via. That
> is I want
> that the function is evaluated by the script of the specified object.
>
> E.g.:
>
> In Supercard you can write :
>
>  put getSomeData(1,the date,tMyVar,tAnOtherVar) via btn "MyButton" of \
>    cd 10 of stack "someStack" into tMyResult
>
> How to translate that into rev?
>
>  -- does not work:
>  send "get getSomeData(1,the date,tMyVar,tAnOtherVar)" to \
>    btn "MyButton" of cd 10 of stack "someStack" into tMyResult
>  put it into tMyResult
>
>  -- does not work or dont give the expected result:
>  get value("getSomeData(1,the date,tMyVar,tAnOtherVar)", \
>    btn "MyButton" of cd 10 of stack "someStack")
>  put it into tMyResult
>
>  -- work around but not elegant:
>  -- getSomeData is no more a function but a handler...
>  call "getSomeData "1,the date,tMyVar,tAnOtherVar" of \
>    btn "MyButton" of cd 10 of stack "someStack"
>  put the result into tMyResult
>
> Of course, putting the script of the target object in the message path is
> some other possibility but I would exclude this for implementation reason.
>
> Maybe the "function via object" a feature for the wish list?
>
> Or did I miss something?
>
> Joel
>
> > Message: 9
> > Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2003 06:40:44 -0700
> > To: use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> > From: "Jeanne A. E. DeVoto" <jeanne at runrev.com>
> > Subject: Re: Equivalence to the SuperCard function call "via" object
> > Reply-To: use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> >
> > At 1:30 AM -0700 7/5/03, Joël Guillod wrote:
> >>>> Is there an equivalent to the following Supercard statement?
> >>>>
> >>>> functionName([paramList]) via object
> >>
> >> YES I did but it does not behave as described in the docs,
> only the "me"
> >> keyword is related to the optional object param.
> >
> >
> > What exactly are you trying to do?
> >
> > --
> > Jeanne A. E. DeVoto ~ jeanne at runrev.com
> > Runtime Revolution Limited - Software at the Speed of Thought
> > http://www.runrev.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution