----- Original Message ----- From: "Kerry Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > And, yes, MM regards it as NAB. Ask Chris Nuuja if you doubt my > credibility. Their position was that you should never use <void> in a > boolean comparison--you should check for voidP first. Otherwise, it's no > more a bug than a divide by zero.
That's an interesting conclusion, which I would argue with. But if they've decreed that's the way it is then I suppose there's not much anyone can do about it. I might check the documentation later to see if it explictly says anything to the contrary. BTW, sorry if you took offense at my comments, they are more a question of disbelief that Macromedia would regard VOID = true as not a bug than anything to do with your own credibility - though we do all make mistakes, which is easier to believe. I can believe what you say is true, but I still don't accept the logic. VOID = 0 = false, always. As far as I am concerned, that is, or should be, gospel. JOOI, on a system that does exhibit this bug (and I am still regarding it as a bug, especially since it varies between platforms), what would be the result of (VOID<>false) ? Presumably the bug can be reproduced on any affected system with: a = VOID if( a ) then alert( "This system has a BUGGY implementation of Lingo, no matter what Macromedia may say" ) end if It shouldn't matter what the steps leading up to this point are, since VOID is VOID is VOID, no? - Robert [To remove yourself from this list, or to change to digest mode, go to http://www.penworks.com/lingo-l.cgi To post messages to the list, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Problems, email [EMAIL PROTECTED]). Lingo-L is for learning and helping with programming Lingo. Thanks!]
