--- In [email protected], "entropyreduction" <alancampbelllists+ya...@...> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "Sheri" <sherip99@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "entropyreduction" > > <alancampbelllists+yahoo@> wrote: > > > > > > Just a change in com.object_description; can now take any of > > > > > > n show name > > > d show description > > > f show functions > > > p show parameters for each function (ignored if f absent) > > > t show return type and function parameters (ignored if f absent, > > > latter ignored ignored if p absent) > > > h get help strings for each function (ignored if f absent) > > > Problematic. "f" by itself generates an error. It no longer seems > > to be possible to get the functions together with parameters and > > their types as shown below (generated with "fdn" of an > > appRef.Selection using previous test version). > > So "fpt" doesn't work? "f" works on my machine: OTOH as usual I'm > always tinkering, so maybe what was in 0.72 091204 isn't what I > got.
Weird, its working today. Previously neither "f" nor "func" nor "function" worked alone. And couldn't get "t" and "p" to work together or with "h". > > Not sure what previous version did for optional parameters > > (hopefully indicated in some way). > > Not indicated. I've just figured out how to get relevant flags, > will test and post Monday. Also IN and OUT flags possible. > > Formatting is up for neogtiation. At moment is C-ish. Could be more VB-ish > e.g. > > Objects* ItemByRange(VARIANT from, VARIANT to) => > ItemByRange(from As VARIANT, to as VARIANT) As Objects* I think the C-ish one looks more similar to how it needs to be formatted for Powerpro. > > > Would be nice to be able to get a similar listing to that below > > plus the help string. Where requested, IMO the help string should > > be delimited by a new line (not a semicolon). > > That'll be harder to parse, surely, in that can no longer use > line function to get everything to do with one function. How > about a tab before help string. OK, less likely that description or help fields have their own tabs than semicolons. It seemed more like a preformatted report when multiple elements are requested, after all name and description are on their own lines (so why not the help string?) > I'm pretty sure each parameter has a description string as well, > but haven't figures out to to grab it. Yes, I can see them in the provided documentation I have. appRef.Selection was an "Objects" handle. FWIW, the following is all tabular in the provided documentation: (under "Objects" under Methods (note: "Objects" Properties are in their own table not mixed in with Methods) Method Returns Description ItemByRange Objects Returns the Objects within the specified range. (parameters subtable is presented within the Method Description column) Parameter Type Description >From Variant The Object or the index or name of the Object at the beginning of the range as Object, Long or String. To Variant The Object or the index or name of the Object at the end of the range as Object, Long or String. [Looking at the content above, appears that a variant argument here can be an object OR an index OR a name.] The headings in the Properties section are Property, Type, Access and Description. Instead of separate lines for something that supports both get and put, it has one line with an Access of "r/w"; otherwise it says "read". Any alternate named constants applicable to a Property are listed underneath the Description in the Description column with headings Name and Decimal. (I wonder if those names and decimal values are somewhere accessible? -- maybe necessary to parse the tlb file directly for them?) The headings in the Functions section are Method, Returns (i.e., Type) and Description. Under Description are those help strings. For functions that have parameters there is a subtable presented under the Description within the Description column with headings: Parameter, Type, and Description (this description appears to be a help string for he parameter). > Can deal with it (e.g., with replacechars), but it would also be > nice if get_object_description used CRLFs instead of LFs when it > makes new lines. > > Done. > Regards, Sheri
