Hi Alex, I entered bug# 10070 about this back in March. Trevor DeVore added a comment that it was a duplicate of bug# which dates back to July 2008. Any bets on whether this will ever be fixed?
Pete lcSQL Software <http://www.lcsql.com> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 4:31 PM, Alex Tweedly <a...@tweedly.net> wrote: > On 01/10/2012 00:15, Richard Gaskin wrote: > >> >> I would have expected it, but I can see value in allowing what you >> suggest. I'm just not sure how to go about it. >> >> Args are evaluated before being passed in, so: >> >> increment tA[1] >> >> ...becomes: >> >> increment (the value of element "1" in the array tA) >> >> ? > So doesn't > increment t > become > increment (the value of t) > > ? > > If you look closely at the simple case > >> command increment @p >> add 1 to p >> end increment >> >> on mouseUp >> local t, tA >> put 2 into t >> increment t >> put t &CR after msg >> > you see that *because the parameter specifies 'pass-by-ref',* a reference > to the container is passed, without evaluating the actual parameter. So > what I woudl expect (or at least, wht I want :-) is for > increment tA[1] > to be evaluated as far as > increment (the reference to the container tA[1]) > > One option for passing the array would be to pass the whole thing with a >> specifier for the element to be affected as a separate argument: >> >> increment tA, 1 >> >> But you've probably already considered that. >> >> Yeah. My problem is that I have a whole set of functions that take in an > array, passed by ref, and update that array; I've now realized that *in > some cases* the calling handlers don't need just one (or two) array(s) - > they need to handle a large number of arrays. So I changed all the code > from something like > > ("read the data into gArray") > put myFn(gArray) into tResult > > into something like > repeat for each dataset D > read data into gArray[D] > put myFn(gArray[D]) into wherever > end repeat > > But of course, in other places, I still only have a single array to deal > with. > > For now I've inserted the ugly construct > > repeat for each dataset D > read data into gArray[D] > put gArray[D] into temparray > put myFn(temparray) into wherever > put temparray into Array[D] > end repeat > > (ick !! - but it works) > > So we have a question: if enough folks find this sort of suggested >> syntax useful, by what syntactic means could we tell the interpreter not to >> evaluate the argument? >> > > There's no need for any syntactic means - the use of "by-ref" in the > handler specification is already there, and is already used to > differentiate how to pass it in the "simple case" (unless I'm missing > something). > > -- Alex. > ______________________________**_________________ > 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<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
