On Sep 20, 2011, at 11:20 AM, Dave Cragg wrote: > > On 20 Sep 2011, at 16:45, Tereza Snyder wrote: > >> >> Is it crazy to assume that if "=" works, then "<>" (or in other languages, >> "!=") would also? > > Not crazy, but we know we shouldn't assume too much. Some of us don't have > six hours of hair to lose. :-)
Yeah, there’s a reason I always wear a hat in public. > > If it is intended to be taken literally as "less than or greater than" then > it is probably working correctly.On the other hand, the docs say it's a > synonym for "is not", but "is not" appears to work with arrays also. The > following work the same: > > not(array1 = array2) > (array1 is not array2) This is what I’m using now that I’ve abandoned "<>". > > So a documentation error perhaps. Even if the docs were clear (e.g. "<>" does not apply to arrays, use "not(A1=A2)" instead), it would still be wrong, in my opinion. t -- Tereza Snyder Califex Software, Inc. <www.califexsoftware.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
