Using 'for each' to modify a container

Mark Smith mark at maseurope.net
Thu Oct 12 03:03:10 EDT 2006


Clearly, it shouldn't be necessary, but I wonder if putting empty  
into LNN or "delete variable LNN" after each loop has finished would  
cure that?

Best,
Mark


On 12 Oct 2006, at 07:51, Jim Ault wrote:

> Hello, Jacque,
>
> On 10/11/06 8:14 PM, "J. Landman Gay" <jacque at hyperactivesw.com>  
> wrote:
>
>> Bill Marriott wrote:
>>
>>> And I'm *really* concerned about the second part of your report
>>>
>>>> Further, I don't reuse the name 'thisLine' in the next instance  
>>>> of a
>>>> repeat
>>>> for each loop in the *same handler*, but change the name to avoid
>>>> conflict,
>>>> such as 'thisline', 'thisline1', 'thisLine2'.  Again, unpredictable
>>>> results
>>>> occasionally.
>>>
>>> Surely THAT is a definite bug?! Have other people experienced  
>>> this? Are you
>>> able to reproduce it? Is there a bug on it already filed? I do  
>>> this all the
>>> time and I'd have to update a lot of code to fix it.
>>
>> For what it's worth, I do it all the time too and have never had a
>> problem. I think maybe the original poster was just being cautious.
>>
> I am the original poster, and I will explain a bit more.  I have  
> several
> apps that do some intense data parsing, error checks, and  
> reformatting.   At
> some point during the development a few months ago I was trying to  
> chase a
> set of bugs in a handler that were very elusive.
>
> My standard repeat form evolved to:
>
> repeat for each line LNN in varList
>   put item 1 to 2 of LNN & cr after newVarList
> end repeat
> delete char -1 of newVarList
>
> and, like you, reused my choice of LNN.  Cool beans.  However...in  
> one long
> handler...
>
> Using Variable Watcher and some test variables, I saw 'LNN' change  
> the way
> you would expect, then later, strangely, it held some garbage  
> characters,
> and thus the bug(s).  The failure was not always the same, but it  
> did fail
> before the end of the process.  By not reusing LNN each time, the  
> problem
> has not returned.
>
> My current system is to use LNN1, LNN2, LNN3, etc.  The reason I  
> use all
> caps is to remind me not to change the variable,
> but rather recast ( eg. get LNN) so I could change the value.
>
> You are right about 'just being cautious'.  I have too much to  
> accomplish to
> go through the 'strange debug' again.
>
> Jim Ault
> Las Vegas
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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




More information about the Use-livecode mailing list