On 1 Apr 2006, at 05:01, James Spencer wrote:
On Mar 31, 2006, at 8:59 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote:
If all else fails, you can always declare a local script variable
to hold the array and then just use that. No passing of anything
required. Or you could try passing the variable by reference (add
an @ sign in front of the parameter) which seems like it should
work but I haven't tried it.
I think both would probably work but the issue at the moment is
that I did not write the library that is creating the original
array and that eventually expects me to pass an array back. The
author had no reason to know that the output from their function
creating the array would be passed back to the other handler as
there is no necessary connection between the two and I don't want
to mess with the library code myself mostly because I'm being
pedantic.
What definitely works is to copy the array myself, element by
element, to a local variable and then pass that back to the
library. This works fine in this limited situation because the
number of entries in these "arrays" (I hate the name; in this
context, they are really a dictionary or a hash) is limited and is
predetermined so doing the extra copying works fine.
There's really no need to copy it entry by entry, you can just copy
the whole array as in:
put LibGetArray() into myArray1
put LibAnotherFunction(myArray1) into myArray2 --Here you could put
it back into Array1
I do this all the time.
What you can't do is this:
put LibAnotherFunction (LibGetArray()) into myArrayX
All the Best
Dave
_______________________________________________
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
