That is odd because it wouldn't compile for me. Not sure why we are seeing different things. There cannot be a command or function that uses a reserved word so "with" cannot be a command or function.
Bob On Jun 27, 2012, at 8:46 PM, Peter Haworth wrote: > Hi Peter, and Bob, > I see what you're saying but if that's the case I would have expected to > get a compile error. "with p1, p2" is certainly not a valid instruction. > > Although I just checked that out by inserting exactly that line in a the > middle of a script - no compile error. I think it is interpreting it as a > call to a handler named "with". However, when the script ran, it failed > with a runtime error on that line. Even tried it with a comment line > immediately before it and same runtime error. > > I suppose there's only so much you can expect the compile phase to do but I > still think that should have resulted in a runtime error rather than just > ignoring that line > > My least favorite LC compile problem is that it seems to be incapable of > distinguishing: > > repeat for each line tLine in ... > > from > > repeat with x=1 to ….. > > If I mix the two: > > repeat for x=1 to ….. > > … the compile doesn't catch it but I get a runtime error. > > Pete > lcSQL Software <http://www.lcsql.com> > > > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 8:17 PM, Peter M. Brigham <pmb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I think that's because according to Bob's analysis, the parser sees "with >> p1, p2" as a misconstructed line of script, not as a comment. >> > _______________________________________________ > 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 _______________________________________________ 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
