On 13 Jul 2003, at 21:01, P Witte wrote:
..plus array slicing, of course
? doesn't that work in Turbo?
Wolfgang
-
www.wlenerz.com
Wolfgang Lenerz writes:
As an example, I have at least two assembler toolkits of a total of
17000 bytes (compiled) - I don't really know how many assembler
lines that makes. At least some fo the commands se vector $120 -
this is an easy way of returning several values tro Sbasic by one
.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 6:02 AM
Subject: Re: [ql-users] Dynamic arrays?
First of all, thanks to all of you who replied.
It transpires that there simply doesn't seem to be a way to do what I
wanted.
P Witte wrote
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Thierry Godefroy
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
SNIP
(that was when I still had some time to develope under SMSQ/E...).
Does this mean you are no longer writing for SMSQ/E ? I hope it does
not. I always thought that you were one of the best writers we had and I
was
In a message dated 08/07/2003 07:43:47 GMT Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I wonder whether anybody out there has come across the same
problem I have, (and has found a solution).
Basically, what I would like is to be able to re-dimension an array within
a subroutine (proc/fn) BY
On Tue, 8 Jul 2003 05:25:25 EDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 08/07/2003 10:16:25 GMT Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Thanks.
However the temp array wouldn't survive the exit from the proc/fn and,
moreover, I would have to redim each array specifically instead of just
O(...)
SMSQ/e has an outstanding bug in this instance as well - take for example:
10 DIM x(10)
20 c=1:TEST c,x
100 DEFine PROCedure TEST(a,b)
110 DIM b(100)
120 END DEFine
Running this program gives the error as described.
True.
However, try entering as a direct command:
CLEAR:
The real solution to this problem is a linked list. But, SuperBasic (and Basic
in general) does not support a linked list. I believe by definition DIMed arrays
are not able to change after allocation.
One could ask for some memory (ALLOC or something like that) and handle the
memory any way
First of all, thanks to all of you who replied.
It transpires that there simply doesn't seem to be a way to do what I
wanted.
P Witte wrote:
1) Dimension the array to the max youre ever going to need right from the
start. (This is analogous to your suggestion re the buffer problem we
