>> Setting the stack ID to a number below it's current ID is a risk and >> you are right it's bad practice (I was just trying to work out how >> you end up with an id of 0 and I still couldn't replicate it) but >> going the other way is the only way we have to manage icon libraries. > > The docs say you aren't supposed to be able to set a stack ID to anything > lower than its current one. I'm surprised you could set it to a negative > number, you aren't supposed to be able to do that either.
Ok, that's probably why I got the execution error with all but the negative numbers. > > "A stack's ID is equal to the ID that will be assigned to the next object > created within that stack, so the stack ID is subject to change." > > Maybe when you set it to zero, the engine pushed it back up again? I never said I set it to 0. I was trying to because the original poster said they were getting 0 ids. Any number between 0 and the current stack id will cause an execution error. I was trying to replicate it but I couldn't. But I did find the negative number thing which is weird although probably not worth fixing considering you would have to be an idiot to set the stack id to a negative number and expect everything to work right. Cheers Monte_______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
