> That's an interesting conclusion, which I would argue with.

A lot of people did ^_^

As I said, the debate became rather acrimonious, to the point that some
people, including MM engineers, left the list. Several people on the
list now were around for the brouhaha--Alex de Franca remembers ^_^

>From where I stand, it's an open question as to whether it is a bug or
not. Personally, I tend to agree with you, since it gives different
Xplat results. The NAB was Macromedia's ruling.

> I might check the documentation 

Don't bother. Your search will return <void>.

> 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?

True, except when it's NULL ;-)

x=NULL
put x
-- <Void>

Actually, that jogs my memory a bit. The syntax may not have been "if
NOT x." It could have been "if x = FALSE" that gave the inconsistent
results. Sadly, I don't even have the code here to double-check. We were
building a command proc on the fly, and one of the methods in one of the
objects (HUGE Coop program) was expecting a return value, and I
discovered that, under certain circumstances, the command proc didn't
return anything.

I can't reproduce it now either, on the systems I have. I wish I could.
The bottom line, though, is that you should check for voidP before doing
any Booleans, at least in Lingo.

In another post, I mentioned that <void> was the absence of a value, and
you said that it is a specific value. Actually, I think we're both
correct. I don't have my Kernighan & Ritchie handy (we just moved, and
boxes are everywhere), but C and Lingo do treat it differently. I was
going by Macromedia's documentation, which says voidP "determines
whether the variable specified by variableName has any value." Since
this is a Lingo list, I was referring to <void> in Lingo. You're right
in other contexts, though. Maybe we should all go back to twiddling bits
in 6502 assembler.

Cordially,

Kerry Thompson 

[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!]

Reply via email to