like pass, but without ending the handler

[Mark Schonewille]

Hi Dick,

Why don't you use different handler names?

in stack:

on stackHandler p1,p2,p3
   -- do something
end stackHandler

on cardHandler p1,p2,p3
   stackHandler p1,p2,p3
   -- do something here
end cardHandler

If the card doesn't contain a cardHandler script, you can run the  
stackHandler script by including the cardHandler in the stack script:

on cardHandler p1,p2,p3
   stackHandler p1,p2,p3
end cardHandler

Best,

Mark

--

Economy-x-Talk
Consultancy and Software Engineering
http://economy-x-talk.com
http://www.salery.biz

Get your store on-line within minutes with Salery Web Store software.  
Download at http://www.salery.biz

Op 28-feb-2007, om 9:11 heeft Dick Kriesel het volgende geschreven:

> If you have a handler that needs to do something after letting the  
> message
> proceed along the message path, here’s a pithy way:
>     call the params of the owner of me
>
> One example scenario involves a newGroup handler that needs its  
> owner’s more
> general handler to run before the more specific handler can finish  
> its task.
>
> For a demonstration, try the following:
>
> 1. create a new main stack and give it this script:
>      on foo p1,p2,p3
>        put "hello from" && me && "with" && the params & cr after msg
>      end foo
> 2. give the card this script:
>      on foo p1,p2
>        put ""
>        call the params of the owner of me
>        put "hello from" && me && "with" && the params & cr after msg
>      end foo
> 3. in the message box, enter "foo 1,2,3" without the quotes
> 4. see the following:
>      hello from stack "Untitled 1" with foo "1","2","3"
>      hello from card id 1002 with foo "1","2","3"
>
> It works for me.  If you find a case where it doesn't, please let  
> me know.
>
> Or is there a better way for an initialization handler to invoke  
> its parents
> without skipping remaining statements?
>
> -- Dick
>