Yes, it is ’the Result’, I just checked it - good hint, Dave ! didn’t think about that before…
Jacques > Le 14 nov. 2014 à 17:56, Dave Cragg <dave.cr...@lacscentre.co.uk> a écrit : > > Tiemo, > > Interesting. It looks like functions return the value of "the result" in the > absence of a return statement. > > Other languages would probably return "void" or "null" or something similar, > and we might expect Livecode to return "empty". > > I've no opinion on whether it is a bug or not, but I think it is probably > better to specifically return a value from a function. We don't always have > control over what appears in "the result". > > Cheers > Dave > > > > On 14 Nov 2014, at 08:47, Tiemo Hollmann TB <toolb...@kestner.de> wrote: > >> By accident I noticed that I don't have a return at a certain point of a >> function but nevertheless the value was passed back without a return to the >> calling handler. >> >> I can reproduce the issue to this scenario: >> >> >> >> --Btn script >> >> on mouseUp >> >> put foo1() into myVar1 -- I get the value "Test" >> >> end mouseUp >> >> >> >> --script in stack >> >> function foo1 >> >> put foo2() into myVar2 -- no return in this function >> >> end foo1 >> >> >> >> function foo2 >> >> return "Test" -- return here in second level >> >> end foo2 >> >> >> >> Up to now I thought that every function has to have a return statement if >> you want anything getting back. >> >> Can somebody explain to me what is going on here? How is the value from >> function foo2 passed back to the mouseup handler, even with different var >> names? >> >> Is this a bug or just an accident or even wanted? >> >> Thanks for enlightening >> >> Tiemo _______________________________________________ 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
