>"send", the context of the handler will be where the handler is
>located. So if a handler on Card A sends a message to Card B, a
>reference to field 1 in the running handler on Card B will refer to
>field 1 of Card B.
>
>But this doesn't seem to be so. I'm having to specifically include
>the card reference for fields to get such messages to work. In this
>case the message is sent to a card in the same stack.
>
>When using a setprop handler to achieve the same result, I had the
>same context problem.
>
>Have I misunderstood the docs, or is there something I may have overlooked?
>
>I know about the general inadvisability of using "send", and I'm
>generally a good boy which may be why I haven't seen this problem
>before. But I have a situation where it is convenient (if not
>necessary) to do this.
Actually, the "send" penalty in MC is significantly lower than in other
xTalks. With SuperCard and HyperCard, it's about 75% slower than simply
letting messages follow the message path, but in MC this is only about
24% slower.
But expressed in absolute terms, the difference is even less substantial:
Using the "send" command takes about 0.00084 ticks per call, compared
with the natural message path which uses about 0.00065 ticks per call
(tested using MetaBench on a PowerBook G3 366MHz). In both cases, the
overhead of making the call is neglible.
Now, about the object reference question: It's hard to follow what's
happening from the description alone. If you could post the syntax
you're using, we can identify what's going on and make recommendations
from there.
- Richard Gaskin
Fourth World
Multimedia Design and Development for Mac, Windows, UNIX, and the Web
_____________________________________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.FourthWorld.com
US: 800-288-5825 Int'l: 323-225-3717 Fax: 323-225-0716
