>>" If the XML gets larger and deeper, that function would fail... " - why would it fail? (assuming that the level var could be whatever you want?
(OK, I am not trying to argue with you here, I promise) Because that's exactly it, if the levels got deeper, you would have to know how deep in order to change the variable - human intervention. Otherwise, if you didn't manually keep the XML in synch with the variable value, it would fail. And how could you know that dynamically without doing a recursive function, which is what I suggested. It gets worse if a system produces the XML. So what would be advantage of your suggestion over mine? Yours would require a manual tweaking of the level variable. A recursive function would not that value to be set at all. And a recursive function could be set to only check down to a certain level if you wanted that, or only check certain specific levels. Jason Merrill Instructional Technology Architect II Bank of America Global Learning _______________________ -----Original Message----- From: flashcoders-boun...@chattyfig.figleaf.com [mailto:flashcoders-boun...@chattyfig.figleaf.com] On Behalf Of Ktu Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 2:14 PM To: Flash Coders List Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Simplify XML Call "that would be limited to you hard coding the number of levels to go down to" - he already had this level var created with whatever number he had intended, I was just giving an example value... " If the XML gets larger and deeper, that function would fail... " - why would it fail? (assuming that the level var could be whatever you want? "it would be a better idea to check the length of the array instead" - John didn't indicate that this was a problem of verifying the data, but instead wishing to write the same code in fewer lines. That is what I did. I do agree with you though, that error checking would be good to have. I've changed my code to test creating the string required. This is a TEST to prove that my code would indeed create the referencing desired. var level:int = 5; var str:String = "xml.menu" for (var i:int = 1; i < level; i++) { str += ".item[whichItem" + ((i == 1) ? "" : i) + "]"; } str += ".item.length()"; change level to whatever you want and it will produce the same lines of code John reference above. Clearly this doesn't work, but since such little information was given (especially about the 'whichItemX' variables, this was my shot at it. This here is an updated version of it that breaks out a piece to make it a bit cleaner to read: var level:int = "n"; var xmlItem:* = xml.menu; for (var i:int = 1; i < level; i++) { var which:* = this["whichItem" + ((i == 1) ? "" : i)] xmlItem = xmlItem.item[which]; } totalItems = xmlItem.item.length(); John, I think if we are going to be able to help you further we would need more information about how this xml is truly setup, and wher some of these values come from (whichItem, whichItem2..., level) On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:58 PM, Henrik Andersson <he...@henke37.cjb.net>wrote: > While you have the right spirit I think that it would be a better idea > to check the length of the array instead. That way you won't > accidentally step out of bounds there. > > ______________________________**_________________ > Flashcoders mailing list > Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.**com > <Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com> > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/**mailman/listinfo/flashcoders<http://cha > ttyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders> > -- Ktu; The information contained in this message may or may not be privileged and/or confidential. If you are NOT the intended recipient, congratulations, you got mail! _______________________________________________ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders ---------------------------------------------------------------------- This message w/attachments (message) is intended solely for the use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or proprietary. If you are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender, and then please delete and destroy all copies and attachments, and be advised that any review or dissemination of, or the taking of any action in reliance on, the information contained in or attached to this message is prohibited. Unless specifically indicated, this message is not an offer to sell or a solicitation of any investment products or other financial product or service, an official confirmation of any transaction, or an official statement of Sender. Subject to applicable law, Sender may intercept, monitor, review and retain e-communications (EC) traveling through its networks/systems and may produce any such EC to regulators, law enforcement, in litigation and as required by law. The laws of the country of each sender/recipient may impact the handling of EC, and EC may be archived, supervised and produced in countries other than the country in which you are located. This message cannot be guaranteed to be secure or free of errors or viruses. References to "Sender" are references to any subsidiary of Bank of America Corporation. Securities and Insurance Products: * Are Not FDIC Insured * Are Not Bank Guaranteed * May Lose Value * Are Not a Bank Deposit * Are Not a Condition to Any Banking Service or Activity * Are Not Insured by Any Federal Government Agency. Attachments that are part of this EC may have additional important disclosures and disclaimers, which you should read. This message is subject to terms available at the following link: http://www.bankofamerica.com/emaildisclaimer. By messaging with Sender you consent to the foregoing. _______________________________________________ Flashcoders mailing list Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
