>Recently, Brad Allen wrote: > >> These functions would have improved usefulness if they could take an >> object as an argument, as in propertyNames(this stack) or >> functionNames(Revolution). > >You do know about the customKeys and customProperties, yes?
Yes, but those only list the custom properties. Wouldn't it be great if you could have a complete list of all properties, commands, and functions applicable to a given object? For instance, stacks have some properties than fields don't have, and vice versa. For example, propertyNames(Revolution) would output a list of global properties, such as the textArrows, the stacksInUse, the textArrows, etc. propertyNames (stack "Whatever") would output a list of properties such as the cantDelete, the cantAbort, the name, and whatever custom properties are present. propertyNames (field "myField") would output a list of properties such as the name, the wideMargins, the sharedText, etc., plus any custom properties present. functionNames(stack "Whatever") would output a list of functions present in the stack script. functionNames(Revolution) would output a list of functions that exist in the Transcript Language. -- _______________________________________________ improve-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/improve-revolution
