william humphrey wrote:
It's funny. I read all the emails in this list and must learn something but when it is a problem I'm working on and then you guys answer I really do learn something.
I know exactly what you mean. I think it happens to all of us.
I like the idea of trapping the "close field" (you got the idea -- I'm trying to run the next code call without the user having to reach for the mouse) and it will probably be faster as I've noticed that trapping for the "return" introduces a processing delay.
I should probably mention that a closeField message won't be sent if the user doesn't change the text of the field when they leave it. If you only need to run your handler when the text changes, then trapping closefield is enough. But if you want something to happen no matter how the user leaves the field, then you'll also want to trap the exitField message. That message is sent instead of closeField when the cursor leaves the field but the text hasn't changed.
-- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [email protected] HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [email protected] Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
