> Just make 2 timeout objects. . .
>
> Roy Pardi
well, yes, but why should I need to. As I understood it the
new(timeOut...) object stuff is good for sending an event at regular
intervals whilst the <on timeOut> handler and related commands were for
the specific purpose of keeping a track of how long since any user last
interacted with the programme and when a certain period of time was up
executing whatever was in the on timeout handler. All very simple and
efficient. Most times all I need is 1 line of code to set the
timeoutLength, and the <on timeOut> handler to do all the wonderful
whiz/bang animations when appropriate.
Now I have to make an object with, hmmm let me see, 26 lines of code to
do the same thing. Is that progress?
Oh, OK, most of the lines of code are not directly related to the
timeOut function but still, there's considerably more than 1 line of
code. And I still have to ask, why? Why do I now have to delete an
object from a list and then add a new one to achieve the same thing as I
did in one line previously. Why do I now have to create a global
mouseDown handler that detects if there has been user interaction and
call my timeOutObject from that whereas previously this was all part of
the functionality of the <on timeOut> handler?
Come back <on timeOut> handler... I think I love you....
Jon Rowe
[To remove yourself from this list, or to change to digest mode, go to
http://www.penworks.com/LUJ/lingo-l.cgi To post messages to the list,
email [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Problems, email [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Lingo-L is for learning and helping with programming Lingo. Thanks!]
