On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 9:57 AM, <dunb...@aol.com> wrote: > Since LC uses strings as its base unit, it does require a bit more > management. Of course, this also offers exquisite control over those > strings. > > > So although Excel, for example, knows that a value of "$50" in a cell is > in actuality a number, LC does not. It is quite literal that way. >
I don't think this quite reflects reality, in two ways: First, as far as I know, LC doesn't use strings as a base unit. If you put 50 into X, LC (I believe) stores X as a number, and doesn't have to do any conversion if you then add 2 to X. Of course, if you put "$50" into X, LC is going to make X a string. Engine-eers, feel free to jump in. Second, it's important to be clear about what Excel does/doesn't do. If you put 50 in a cell, Excel stores the numerical value of 50. If you apply a currency format to the cell, Excel displays the "$" in front of the 50, but the cell is still 50 -- you can set another cell to be the square root of that cell, and Excel won't tell you that the square root of $50 is meaningless; it will just display 7.280109889. If you put $50 in a field, Excel does the same thing as a shortcut: it strips the $, and applies a currency format to the cell. If you put '$50 in a cell, then Excel storing the literal string "$50" and puts a warning on the cell, "Number stored as text." Interestingly, if you set another cell's formula to 3 + your cell, Excel will try to accommodate you and display 53. Note that if you do the same with either of the other two cells (where the cell is actually storing 50) the cell you put that formula in will store 53, but be automatically formatted as currency, and display as $53. Excel's cleverness would be tricky to replicate in LC -- not because LC can't do each of the above things, but doing them in a way that "just works" the way Excel's formatting does is (as far as I know) not built-in. Off the top of my head, for maximum robustness and flexibility, I'd create two fields, and hide one of them. If that one is called V for value, and the visible one is D for display, then putting this in the script for V: on updateDisplay put "$" & me into fld "D" end updateDisplay would still allow you to do things like this: add 4 to fld "V" send "updateDisplay" to fld "V" and get Excel-like functionality. Likewise, if you put this in fld "D"s script: on textChanged put goodNumber(me) into fld "V" end textChanged ... and your goodNumber function somewhere in the message path, you'd be able to edit the visible value in fld "D", and still derive the numeric value to put back into fld "V" All of that would need to be cleaned up and abstracted from a given pair of fields in order to be truly useful, but for this discussion it gets the job done. gc _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
