On 7/10/11 9:29 AM, Slava Paperno wrote:
I'm curious about globals and the message box. I've been doing both
(omitting the global declaration and including it) and I haven't seen any
difference, but I've seen conflicting opinions in the posts here as well as
some forums. What's the skinny on this?
The message box has access to all globals for me, without any
declarations. I don't use explicitVariables though; maybe that makes a
difference.
It's also fine to put your global declarations inside each handler that
needs to use it. It's become customary to put it at the top of the
script but that isn't required.
In fact, to backtrack a bit, with explicitvariables set to false, it is
actually possible to have both a global and a local variable with the
same name in the same script as long as the global isn't declared at the
top. I know we had a discussion about this before where I agreed it
couldn't happen, but I've just tried it again and in fact you can, if
you declare your global inside the handler:
on setup
global testVar
put 1 into testVar
put testVar
end setup
on test
put 2 into testVar
put testVar
end test
Turn off explicitVariables and run "setup" first from the message box to
make sure the global is initialized. After that you'll get different
numbers depending which you call.
The failure I had when I tested before is that, like most people, I was
declaring the global outside the handlers. I'd never recommend this kind
of naming, of course.
--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
_______________________________________________
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
