Doh! I missed that one too... I still generally find it more useful to manually name the outputs though- makes it easier to tell what they're for.
a|x http://machinesdontcare.wordpress.com ----- Original Message ---- From: Christopher Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "lists @ tobyz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Quartz Composer Dev List <quartzcomposer-dev@lists.apple.com> Sent: Monday, 4 August, 2008 1:15:50 AM Subject: Re: Javascript: Numbered Outputs > But switching that round won't execute in any form I've thought of > so far, but the GUI adapts as you'd expect. > function (__number outputNumber[2]) main (__number inputNumber) > { > var result = new Object(); > result.outputNumber[0] = inputNumber; > result.outputNumber[1] = inputNumber; > return result; > } > Am I missing something blindingly obvious, or attempting the > "unpossible"? function (__number outputNumber[2]) main(__number inputNumber) { var result = new Object(); result.outputNumber = new Array(2); result.outputNumber[0] = inputNumber; result.outputNumber[1] = inputNumber; return result; } Don't forget to allocate arrays before you assign values to them :) -- [ christopher wright ] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://kineme.net/ __________________________________________________________ Not happy with your email address?. Get the one you really want - millions of new email addresses available now at Yahoo! http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/ymail/new.html
_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Quartzcomposer-dev mailing list (Quartzcomposer-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/quartzcomposer-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
