>This isn't the type of do I'm worried about. I'm worried about when you're
>doing it as FreeScript. In a do as AppleScript/Perl/whatever I don't have
>to worry about it ;)
Okay, well I have created one stack which allows a very simple
presentation to be created easily and this is achieved by adding buttons
for different functions etc, which then write pure HyperTalk into a field
(so that it can be easily viewed and manually edited if desired), then
when the presentation is to be run, I simply "do" each line of the field.
Simple. Also, it has some advanced features like combining two sources
for a command and doing that. ie: do line 1 of cd fld 1 && cd fld
"parameters" These parameters are changed dynamically throughout the
presentation.
While this could be achieved without do, it simply isn't worth it. I
would have literally had to implement my own do command.
Um, this is a new thought for me here. Why couldn't we implement do in
FreeScript? What you'd need to do is have a place for these temp scripts
it could be a card button but would be better if it was somewhere that is
more out of the way. Then add a do handler to the home stack similar to:
on do theCommand
set the script of cd btn "Do" to "on doCommand" & return & theCommand
& return & "end doCommand"
send "doCommand" to cd btn "Do"
end do
Oh, no local variables. Still, there as a backup if Anthony decides
against "do". Please don't make us resort to this!
Enough thinking on my feet,
Adrian Sutton.
