SO does that mean that if he used BACKGROUND is a SubRoutine he would
get the correct or desired action , from his point of view? It would
jump to the 1 Extension in the SUBROUTINE ?
Tilghman Lesher wrote:
On Thursday 10 July 2008 19:13:50 Douglas Garstang wrote:
It's a known problem.
-Commercial Discussion
asterisk-users@lists.digium.com
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 6:07:36 PM
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk as an IVR solution
On Thursday 10 July 2008 19:13:50 Douglas Garstang wrote:
It's a known problem.
If you call Background() in a macro, then Asterisk will look
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 8:28 AM, Douglas Garstang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well I can tell you that it makes a difficult programming environment, just
a little more difficult. It means I can't implement a menu as a single
reusable piece of code inside a macro.
I do the IVR stuff in a context
On Friday 11 July 2008 01:28:34 Douglas Garstang wrote:
Well I can tell you that it makes a difficult programming environment, just
a little more difficult. It means I can't implement a menu as a single
reusable piece of code inside a macro.
That's the point. A Macro is NOT a subroutine.
: [asterisk-users] Asterisk as an IVR solution
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 8:28 AM, Douglas Garstang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well I can tell you that it makes a difficult programming environment, just
a little more difficult. It means I can't implement a menu as a single
reusable piece of code inside
On Friday 11 July 2008 01:05:22 Al Baker wrote:
Tilghman Lesher wrote:
On Thursday 10 July 2008 19:13:50 Douglas Garstang wrote:
It's a known problem.
If you call Background() in a macro, then Asterisk will look for the
extensions to jump to in the CALLING Macro/context and NOT the
On Friday 11 July 2008 09:22:25 Douglas Garstang wrote:
Yes, and by doing that your compounding the fact that all your variables
are global.
No, his variables are local to the channel he's using. Global variables are
a completely different beast.
--
Tilghman
Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
asterisk-users@lists.digium.com
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 7:20:40 AM
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk as an IVR solution
On Friday 11 July 2008 01:28:34 Douglas Garstang wrote:
Well I can tell you that it makes a difficult programming
@lists.digium.com
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 7:36:54 AM
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk as an IVR solution
On Friday 11 July 2008 09:22:25 Douglas Garstang wrote:
Yes, and by doing that your compounding the fact that all your variables
are global.
No, his variables are local to the channel he's using
-users@lists.digium.com
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 7:36:54 AM
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk as an IVR solution
On Friday 11 July 2008 09:22:25 Douglas Garstang wrote:
Yes, and by doing that your compounding the fact that all your variables
are global.
No, his variables are local
On Friday 11 July 2008 09:40:55 Douglas Garstang wrote:
Well, a macro is the closest thing the dial plan has to a subroutine, and
without that, we might as well be programming in Assembler (no subroutines,
local variables, lots of goto's... sound familiar?).
I've mentioned Gosub at least twice
A subroutine with arguments?
- Original Message
From: Tilghman Lesher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
asterisk-users@lists.digium.com
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 8:58:46 AM
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk as an IVR solution
: [asterisk-users] Asterisk as an IVR solution
On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, Douglas Garstang wrote:
Ugh. Yes, the variables are local to the current channel. However, they
are global to the entire dial plan within the current channel. I have
stepped on myself many times because I've had a loop counter
On Friday 11 July 2008 12:07:37 Douglas Garstang wrote:
A subroutine with arguments?
In 1.6, yes, or in the 1.4 backport, yes.
--
Tilghman
___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
AstriCon 2008 - September 22 - 25
From: Steve Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, Douglas Garstang wrote:
Ugh. Yes, the variables are local to the current channel. However, they
are global to the entire dial plan within the current channel. I have
stepped on myself many times because I've had a loop counter
Could you clarify how you end up with 1.4 Backport ?
If you go to DIGIUM and download 1.4 do you have a backport 1.4 or is
there
a super-secret-non-more-secret-archive one would get it from ?
I have never really understood this.
Thank You
Tilghman Lesher wrote:
On Friday 11 July 2008 12:07:37
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
asterisk-users@lists.digium.com
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 7:20:40 AM
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk as an IVR solution
On Friday 11 July 2008 01:28:34 Douglas Garstang wrote:
Well I can tell you
Thank You - clears up a LOT I did not fully grasp
Tilghman Lesher wrote:
On Friday 11 July 2008 01:05:22 Al Baker wrote:
Tilghman Lesher wrote:
On Thursday 10 July 2008 19:13:50 Douglas Garstang wrote:
It's a known problem.
If you call Background() in a macro, then
On Friday 11 July 2008 21:24:10 Al Baker wrote:
Tilghman Lesher wrote:
On Friday 11 July 2008 12:07:37 Douglas Garstang wrote:
A subroutine with arguments?
In 1.6, yes, or in the 1.4 backport, yes.
Could you clarify how you end up with 1.4 Backport ?
If you go to DIGIUM and download
Hi.
We are building an application that will provide users with the ability to
call in and report an absence. The caller will have to validate themselves
and the call tree will be dynamic, based on data in a MySQL database. We
will have many customers, each calling a separate phone number, each
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 1:25 PM, Mark Carpenter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi.
We are building an application that will provide users with the ability to
call in and report an absence. The caller will have to validate themselves
and the call tree will be dynamic, based on data in a MySQL
Yes,asterisk can do that
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 12:25 PM, Mark Carpenter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi.
We are building an application that will provide users with the ability to
call in and report an absence. The caller will have to validate themselves
and the call tree will be dynamic,
Hey,
I am doing a similar project , which we will be integrating mysql db and a
ivr, maybe we can work on this together since we will be sharing components.
This should save us both some time.
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 12:25 PM, Mark Carpenter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi.
We are building an
into a god aweful mess.
Sure, you can do it.
Doug.
- Original Message
From: Steve Totaro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
asterisk-users@lists.digium.com
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 10:37:55 AM
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk as an IVR
Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
asterisk-users@lists.digium.com
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 10:37:55 AM
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk as an IVR solution
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 1:25 PM, Mark Carpenter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi.
We
@lists.digium.com
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 12:37:31 PM
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk as an IVR solution
From what I can tell Read allows for a floating point input which uses
ast_waitfordigit that accepts milliseconds as input.
Douglas Garstang wrote:
Admittedly I have not used the ExternalIVR app
-users] Asterisk as an IVR solution
From what I can tell Read allows for a floating point input which uses
ast_waitfordigit that accepts milliseconds as input.
Douglas Garstang wrote:
Admittedly I have not used the ExternalIVR app. Is it any good?
I'm not sure I agree that Asterisk is GOOD
Yes , you could easily do this with asterisk.
If you have formal specs for this project, I would be interested in exactly
what you are trying to do. Email me off-line.
Steve Totaro wrote:
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 1:25 PM, Mark Carpenter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
@lists.digium.com
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 4:50:19 PM
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk as an IVR solution
Why can't you call Background() from a MACRO ?
Isn't is just an Application like any other ?
Curious minds want to know !
Quote There's also the fact that you can't
call Backgound() in a macro
On Thursday 10 July 2008 19:13:50 Douglas Garstang wrote:
It's a known problem.
If you call Background() in a macro, then Asterisk will look for the
extensions to jump to in the CALLING Macro/context and NOT the Macro that
the Background() app was called in.
I wouldn't call it a known
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 9:07 PM, Tilghman Lesher
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 10 July 2008 19:13:50 Douglas Garstang wrote:
It's a known problem.
If you call Background() in a macro, then Asterisk will look for the
extensions to jump to in the CALLING Macro/context and NOT the
31 matches
Mail list logo
