That's what I'm doing... By design in fact. It's older code so I don't
recall exactly why but my comments suggest I had a reason:
// First lets see if the value exists by passing the key to check for
value
result=checkForKey(aKey)
// If the result was nil then lets bail otherwise we'll process and pass
an array
if result<> nil then
// Split the string into an array
arrayString=result.stringValue.split("|")
return arrayString
end
The code I posted earlier is in a "toolbox" module so I was really wanting
to put my "test" logic there. It seems reasonable to be able to test for
nil on an array since just asking for it's size and testing for -1 throws
the nilobject exception. I guess I could catch the exception but I always
hate to do that...
~joe
On 12/7/06 3:28 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Dec 07, 2006, at 21:14 UTC, JC wrote:
>
>> Well xArray is being passed to this method and if it's "nil" this
> doesn't
>> work. Anyway it appears that I can't test for nil because the array
> isn't
>> an object.
>
> That's true -- but you generally shouldn't have a nil array reference
> anyway. The only way I know of that this can happen is if you have a
> method with an array return type that fails to explicitly Return
> something. Fix that, and then this becomes a nonissue.
>
> Best,
> - Joe
>
>
> --
> Joe Strout -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Verified Express, LLC "Making the Internet a Better Place"
> http://www.verex.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
> <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
>
> Search the archives of this list here:
> <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
