simple custom property question

[Stephen Barncard]

  I've been experimenting successfully with obtaining all properties 
of an object and storing them in a custom property, then later 
recreating the object from the property on the fly.

I would imagine it gets more complicated with groups - I haven't done 
this yet - but then the whole group could be stored in a custom 
property set! A group would also have to have other properties 
included besides the built in ones, such as scripts and positions of 
the objects contained within the group. One could probably store 
these as properties of the group itself. The group would be the 
'first out' for parsing, and other params needed could be pulled from 
it.

Groups within groups would necessitate some recursive code, and more 
complexity. But that is often rare unless one wants to deconstruct 
and reconstruct a complete stack in this manner!!

But Ken is totally right - 'copy group' is a lot easier!

sqb


>Otherwise, you can't really store a true group object inside a custom
>property AFAIK - you could store the binary of a stack with one card that
>only had your group on it, or you could store the specifications of all the
>objects that make up the group and then build it from scratch each time
>based on the specifications for each object.
>But personally, I'd suggest the "copy group" approach...
>Ken Ray