Here's a bug I found in Intellisense today, can anyone confirm it and
even better find a work around? The problem is in Class cCustom3,
trying to reference this. will fail.
*Example of Intellisense Bug in VFP9
DEFINE CLASS cCustom1 as Custom
#IF .F. && Make sure this is false, otherwise error
*-- Define This for IntelliSense use
LOCAL This AS cCustom1 OF testi2.prg
#ENDIF
cTest = 'Test Variable'
PROCEDURE Init
*-- This works with IntelliSense here
This.CTEST = This.cTEST
ENDPROC
ENDDEFINE
DEFINE CLASS cCustom2 AS cCustom1
#IF .F. && Make sure this is false, otherwise error
*-- Define This for IntelliSense use
LOCAL This AS cCustom2 OF testi2.prg
#ENDIF
cTest2 = ""
ADD OBJECT PROTECTED oObj1 AS cCustom1
PROCEDURE Dummy1
*-- This works with IntelliSense here
this.cTest2 = this.cTest2
ENDPROC
ENDDEFINE
DEFINE CLASS cCustom3 AS cCustom2
#IF .F. && Make sure this is false, otherwise error
*-- Define This for IntelliSense use
LOCAL This AS cCustom3 OF testi2.prg
#ENDIF
cTest3 = ""
PROCEDURE Dummy1
*-- Intellisense DOES NOT WORK **
** Trying to reference this. will cause VFP to issue Remove
Classes from Memory Dialog with no way to avoid it **
this.cTest3 = this.cTest3
ENDPROC
ENDDEFINE
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
