Right, I see what happens and I see that you can make use of it test different versions of a handler, but I'd have to respectfully disagree that this isn't a conflict. Seems like minimum there should be a warning of some sort for those of us who didn't know this wasn't an error. Pete lcSQL Software <http://www.lcsql.com>
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 2:55 PM, J. Landman Gay <[email protected]>wrote: > On 12/18/12 4:10 PM, Peter Haworth wrote: > >> I was surprised to discover today that duplicate handler names in a script >> are not flagged as errors when the script is compiled, nor do they cause a >> runtime error. >> >> I can see that a command handler and a function handler might be OK with >> duplicate names (although not sure why you'd want to do that) but I can't >> think of any reason why command handlers with the same name should be >> allowed. >> > > There's no conflict, whichever handler appears first is executed and the > ones below it are ignored. I sometimes use this to test different versions > of a handler, I just keep putting the newest revision at the top. > > -- > Jacqueline Landman Gay | [email protected] > HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com > > ______________________________**_________________ > use-livecode mailing list > [email protected] > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your > subscription preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/**mailman/listinfo/use-livecode<http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode> > _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list [email protected] Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
