Norman Dunbar writes: > >> Which is the downfall of Things - the very vagueness > >> of what it can be means a lot of programmers don't have the knowledge > >> or documentation to implement "things". > > Hee Hee - there a 'series' of articles in QL Toady all about writing Things. > From the Thing Master himself, > morning Jochen, but unfortunately he hasn't had time to finish it yet.
The one thing about Things that still baffles me is extension Thing parameter handling - seen from the inside of the Thing, that is. Does the Thing thing automatically parse the parameters, or is that left to the extension code to handle. If the latter is the case, why bother with all the complexity in the first place? Can someone give some pointers in a few paragraphs, please? Per
