Actually, from what I hear, wrong. From 6.0 on up, what I heard was that Arguments is not a scope, and therefore to use it is misleading.
Andy -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Nolan Erck Sent: Friday, March 19, 2004 1:54 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [CFCDev] Unscoped references in CFSET within CFFUNCTION Am I the only one who sees this thread/problem as a non-issue if you just always always always scope your variables (which is recommended practice by Macromedia anyway)? I mean, yes it's interesting and good to know of the underlying behaviors of CF, how things are copied to the local scope, etc. But if you're concerned about "foo" being "arguments.foo" or not, just put "arguments." in front and be done with it. Right? ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' in the message of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by Mindtool, Corporation (www.mindtool.com). An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' in the message of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by Mindtool, Corporation (www.mindtool.com). An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
