Re: This actually works!

2012-01-20 Thread Justin Scott
> I don't think that is accurate. Yes you can use array/struct functions > on them, but they are not array/structs. Consider this example: I saw your post and ran the code, and you are correct, CF is representing them as an "xml document" rather than arrays and structs. It's been a while since I

Re: This actually works!

2012-01-20 Thread Jochem van Dieten
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 6:03 AM, Justin Scott wrote: > When you use XMLParse(), the resulting variable is a set of arrays and > structures, so it's not just "a lot like working" with them, you > actually are, What does that even mean in a typeless language? The way I always explain it when doin

Re: This actually works!

2012-01-20 Thread Andrew Scott
Cool, well you maybe right. -- Regards, Andrew Scott WebSite: http://www.andyscott.id.au/ Google+: http://plus.google.com/108193156965451149543 On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 11:18 PM, Raymond Camden wrote: > > I repeated my test using xmlParse and got the same results. > > > > >Ray >

Re: This actually works!

2012-01-20 Thread Raymond Camden
I repeated my test using xmlParse and got the same results. Ray Foo #xmlGetNodeType(node)# #node.getClass()# Again, I don't think it's critical, but I really think I'm right here. These _aren't_ exactly array/structs. On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 6:10 AM, Andrew Scott wrot

Re: This actually works!

2012-01-20 Thread Andrew Scott
Raymond, >From what I have experienced what is returned from XMLParse is indeed an associate array, an array of structs, and your example doesn't use XMLParse. So Justin is actually correct. -- Regards, Andrew Scott WebSite: http://www.andyscott.id.au/ Google+: http://plus.google.com/108193156

Re: This actually works!

2012-01-20 Thread Raymond Camden
I don't think that is accurate. Yes you can use array/struct functions on them, but they are not array/structs. Consider this example: Ray Foo #xmlGetNodeType(node)# #node.getClass()# The first output clearly shows much more then a structure and much more than what you

Re: This actually works!

2012-01-19 Thread Justin Scott
> Yeah, thanks Rick, good tip. You'll find that working with CF XML > nodes is a lot like working with structs and arrays, so most of > those array*() and struct*() built-in functions will work with your XML. When you use XMLParse(), the resulting variable is a set of arrays and structures, so it

Re: This actually works!

2012-01-19 Thread Nathan Strutz
Yeah, thanks Rick, good tip. You'll find that working with CF XML nodes is a lot like working with structs and arrays, so most of those array*() and struct*() built-in functions will work with your XML. nathan strutz [www.dopefly.com] [hi.im/nathanstrutz] [about.me/nathanstrutz] On Thu, Jan 19,

This actually works!

2012-01-19 Thread Rick Faircloth
I'm working with XML for my first time and I ran into an issue. This is one of the Categories, Products, Product Details hierarchies. I've got everything figured out so far, but ran into a product node which didn't contain what's called in the document, a "OneLiner" child node. (Now, I was under