Re: wait with messages

[Dar Scott]

On Aug 10, 2004, at 2:06 PM, K wrote:
I seems that when I execute a wait with messages for a specific 
contition and another event execute a wait with messages on a 
different condition the seconds wait cancels the first.
In other mail:
Task aka event '1' is executing code but needs to wait for a variable 
to be altered by a "send in time" task '2'.  Task '2' also realizes it 
must wait on task '3' to alter a variable so it execute the wait with 
messages also.  When task '2' executes this task '1' suddenly aborts 
or returns from it's wait (even though '2' has not made any 
modification to the variable.
This seems to work for me in Rev 2.2 on OS X 10.3.4.
I made this card script:
****************************************************************
local a
local b
on setA
  put true into a
  log "a is set"
end setA
on setB
  put true into b
  log "b is set"
end setB
on test
  put empty
  put false into a
  put false into b
  log "variables are cleared"
  log "before wait for a"
  wait until a with messages
  log "after wait for a"
  log "all done"
end test
on insideTest
  log "before wait for b"
  wait until b with messages
  log "after wait for b"
end insideTest
on log logText
  put the long time && quote & logText & quote after message
  put " a = " & a after message
  put "; b = " & b & lf after message
end log
*****************************************************************
I put on the card 4 buttons, one for each of commands setA, setB, test, 
and insideTest.  I labeled them such and had the mouseUp call the 
corresponding one.

On these button clicks in this order:  test, insideTest, setA, setB
...I get this result:
10:11:24 AM "variables are cleared" a = false; b = false
10:11:24 AM "before wait for a" a = false; b = false
10:11:25 AM "before wait for b" a = false; b = false
10:11:27 AM "a is set" a = true; b = false
10:11:29 AM "b is set" a = true; b = true
10:11:29 AM "after wait for b" a = true; b = true
10:11:29 AM "after wait for a" a = true; b = true
10:11:29 AM "all done" a = true; b = true
That looks right to me.  I tried some variations and those look right.  
Note that because of the nesting, the wait for a is blocked by the wait 
for b.  Looking at the time, you can see that once the setB button is 
clicked, everything wraps up.

Dar Scott
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution