Adam Wozniak wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... > >Chris Percival wrote: > >> So what we have learn't from this is to not assume a function acts like >> another, just because it has the same name... > >What a horrid attitude. If I applied it throughout my life I'd spend a lot of wasted time >questioning things. > >"Joe called that a chair, does that mean I can sit on it?" >even worse... >"Does sitting today mean the same thing it did yesterday?" > >Clearly the function should be renamed. >
Clearly the person who performed the original adaptation and reversed the params from their expected ordering should be subjected to a partial reordering himself ... Seriously ... this was an oversight that should have been corrected early on, but since it has been in existance for this long we are stuck with it. The only real thing you can do is check the docs when you are dealing with a new API, and don't assume that -similar- (not the same) function names have an exact correspondance with one another. -- -Richard M. Hartman [EMAIL PROTECTED] 186,000 mi/sec: not just a good idea, it's the LAW! -- For information on using the ACCESS Developer Forums, or to unsubscribe, please see http://www.access-company.com/developers/forums/
