On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Monte Goulding <mo...@sweattechnologies.com > wrote:
> Well it doesn’t necessarily mean you can’t implement the additional > variable in repeat. It just means you would need to do so directly in the > engine. Out of interest I just took a look ant it wouldn’t be that tricky > to do and at the same time you could support a repeat index variable on all > the repeat styles. Because of that I’d suggest calling it a counter rather > than index as index could get confusing in repeat with. > > repeat for each line tLine in tText with counter tCounter > repeat for 10 with counter tCounter > repeat with tIndex = 1 to 10 step 2 with counter tCounter > repeat while condition with counter tCounter > repeat forever with counter tCounter > > Not sure if I missed anything > > Cheers > > Monte > The beauty of open language (in my dreams, perhaps not the spec) would be that: 1. No one would have to dig into the engine to implement something like this. 2. You could release your "counter" version, I could release my "index" version, and the community would decide which they prefer and go with that. (or both). 3. And neither 1 nor 2 precludes something like this achieving critical mass such that the engine maintainers decide to put it in the engine directly. gc _______________________________________________ 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
