i'm thinking it has something to do with the fact that in the first
example, you're modifying a variable, whereas in the second one, you're
modifying the contents of a field cast member, which is treated
differently by lingo.
-bh
Colin Kettenacker wrote:
>
>
> The direct access to the cast member's text in your second example is weird
> and wonderful though. Too bad it is not consistant with the first example
> you gave. Just a lingo quirk I guess.
>
> [To remove yourself from this list, or to change to digest mode, go to
> http://www.penworks.com/LUJ/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!]
--
R. Bhakti Klein
Multimedia Programmer, Distributed Learning Workshop
http://www.dlworkshop.net/
··
Baritone, Wicki6
http://www.wicki6.com
···
"On Earth, you can only do little things;
but you can do them with a lot of Love."
-- Mother Theresa
[To remove yourself from this list, or to change to digest mode, go to
http://www.penworks.com/LUJ/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!]
