On 12/17/05 9:50 AM, "Ken Ray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 12/17/05 3:14 AM, "Dick Kriesel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Your answer left me a hope that maybe we were just a BZ away from being able >> to use the executionContexts in a standalone, so I decided to search BZ >> before asking about that possibility. > > Dick, are you saying that you can't use executionContexts in a standalone? > Or that you need to know how to use it?
Thanks for asking, Ken. My answer is neither: I'm concerned because of the following message from Scott Raney, which leads me to think there may be some disqualifying problem in the design or implementation of the executionContexts. On 05/31/03 10:54 PM, "Scott Raney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 31 May 2003 curry <curry at pair.com> wrote: > >> How about a function that returns the name of the handler that called >> the current handler? For example, this would be useful when a handler >> needs to reset each time a different handler calls it, or to keep >> track of different sets of data for each handler that calls it. > > You can get this information with the executionContexts function. I > hesitate to even mention it, however, because it was designed for > debugging purposes *only*: using it for conditional execution would > be, IMHO, heinous. Use an optional parameter instead unless you want > your status as an xTalk wizard permanently revoked. > Regards, > Scott Even though I don't have the status of xTalk wizard, that sounds pretty foreboding. -- Dick _______________________________________________ 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