Hi,
This was the script which gave an error:
on mouseUp
put Hello Ken Ray into tMyVar -- HERE IS THE MODIFICATION !
put Goodbye into tAnotherVar
answer value(getSomeData(1,the date, tMyVar , tAnotherVar
),btn 2)
end mouseUp
I think the problem lies in Hello Ken Ray, since it makes
will use the call instruction and request a new feature...
Joel
From: Ken Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Equivalence to the SuperCard function call via object
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 22:59:52 -0500
Organization: Sons of Thunder Software
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED
Joël Guillod wrote:
Thanks for the idea Ken but no this does not help!
Yes, just try your scripts with:
on mouseUp
put Hello Ken Ray into tMyVar -- HERE IS THE MODIFICATION !
put Goodbye into tAnotherVar
answer value(getSomeData(1,the date, tMyVar , tAnotherVar
),btn 2)
end
On Tuesday, July 8, 2003, at 02:08 AM, Joël Guillod wrote:
I suggest to stop this thread discussion because there is no simple
implementation.
Several people have asked just what you want to do. You would likely
find a good response if you describe that.
To get information back from an object
Joel,
My point exactly is that it runs like do, which means that if you need
to put quotes around multiword items. In fact it's probably useful to
quote all variables that are being passed. So the script that works is
this:
on mouseUp
put Hello Ken Ray into tMyVar
put Goodbye into
PROTECTED]
From: Jeanne A. E. DeVoto [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Equivalence to the SuperCard function call via object
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 1:30 AM -0700 7/5/03, Joël Guillod wrote:
Is there an equivalent to the following Supercard statement?
functionName([paramList]) via object
Joël Guillod wrote:
-- does not work or dont give the expected result:
get value(getSomeData(1,the date,tMyVar,tAnOtherVar), \
btn MyButton of cd 10 of stack someStack)
put it into tMyResult
What is the desired result?
--
Richard Gaskin
Fourth World Media Corporation
Developer of
Message: 9
Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2003 06:40:44 -0700
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Jeanne A. E. DeVoto [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Equivalence to the SuperCard function call via object
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 1:30 AM -0700 7/5/03, Joël Guillod wrote:
Is there an equivalent
://www.sonsothunder.com/
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Joël Guillod
Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 12:00 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Equivalence to the SuperCard function call via object
I am trying to do what Supercard do
Is there an equivalent to the following Supercard statement?
functionName([paramList]) via object
I tried the value(), send, call, do expressions in RR but do not get
the intended results.
The value function has an optional object param which lets it behave like
SuperCard's via, if
Joël Guillod wrote:
Is there an equivalent to the following Supercard statement?
functionName([paramList]) via object
I tried the value(), send, call, do expressions in RR but do not get
the intended results.
The value function has an optional object param which lets it behave like
At 1:30 AM -0700 7/5/03, Joël Guillod wrote:
Is there an equivalent to the following Supercard statement?
functionName([paramList]) via object
YES I did but it does not behave as described in the docs, only the me
keyword is related to the optional object param.
What exactly are you trying
Is there an equivalent to the following Supercard statement?
functionName([paramList]) via object
I tried the value(), send, call, do expressions in RR but do not get
the intended results.
Joel
___
use-revolution mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Joël Guillod wrote:
Is there an equivalent to the following Supercard statement?
functionName([paramList]) via object
I tried the value(), send, call, do expressions in RR but do not get
the intended results.
The value function has an optional object param which lets it behave like
14 matches
Mail list logo
