Strict Compile Mode

[J. Landman Gay]

On 10/9/12 11:28 AM, Peter Haworth wrote:

> Still don't understand what "Variable Preservation" was supposed to do
> though.  It sounds like a different thing than "explicit variables" or
> "variable checking".

It's largely historical now. In the olden days, editing and recompiling 
a script would wipe the values of script local variables and set them to 
empty. That meant you had to add lines of code to re-initialize them so 
they'd still work after every edit. It not only made us crazy, it made 
the RR team crazy too, so one of the first things they did after RR 
obtained the engine was to change that. The option to go back to the old 
behavior is still there but I'd be surprised if anyone actually prefers 
to use it.

>
> Seems like starting handler local variable names with "t" is pretty common,
> although not sure what the "t" represents.  Is there a common convention
> for naming script local variables?

Generally "l" or "s", I prefer "s" myself. But it's entirely optional.

>
> I also noticed that some folks declare all their variables in one local
> statement at the top of a handler while others declare them in the body of
> the code right before they are used for the first time.  I'm guessing this
> is just a matter of personal style and preference but any advantages to
> either convention?

The engine doesn't care, it's just personal style.

-- 
Jacqueline Landman Gay         |     jacque at hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software           |     http://www.hyperactivesw.com