Re: [WebDNA] Variable mystery

This WebDNA talk-list message is from

2009


It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 102653
interpreted = N
texte = I'm with Ken though in that I too would want to see the code above the said [search] to determine what all may have been going on before settling for "bug" or "inexplicable-behavior-with-working-workaround". Many many times in coding projects I knew very well all the pieces, but not so well the wholeness (semi-mess) I had created until later when more attention revealed the logic was always performing as it should have.. and it was own failing to think through every step that caused the issue. -G On Jun 3, 2009, at 9:28 AM, Brian Fries wrote: > Ken, you missed the earlier description of the problem wherein his > variable literally contains the square-bracketed name of another > variable, so yes the [interpret] was needed in this case. > > Brian Fries > BrainScan Software > > > On Jun 3, 2009, at 7:02 AM, Kenneth Grome wrote: > >>>> The interpret should not be required when that code is >>>> inside a search context. >>> >>> It shouldn't? >> >> No of course not. Normally you need an interpret context >> only when the tag or context would *not* be interpreted -- >> but [variable] tags are always interpreted by default -- >> unless something prevents it of course ... >> >> There is a preference settings that can affect [variable] >> interpretation, but I don't think many people change, it so >> this is probably not an issue for you anyways. >> >> It must be something you're doing in the code above that >> search context that's preventing the tag from being >> interpreted normally. >> >> >>> The problem definitely went away when I added that >>> interpet context and I didn't make any other changes at >>> that point. >> >> I guess that's all that matters in the grand scheme of >> things anyways ... :) >> >> Sincerely, >> Ken Grome >> > old archives: http://dev.webdna.us/TalkListArchive/ Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:

    
  1. Re: [WebDNA] Variable mystery (Marc Thompson 2009)
  2. Re: [WebDNA] Variable mystery (Brian Fries 2009)
  3. Re: [WebDNA] Variable mystery (Kenneth Grome 2009)
  4. Re: [WebDNA] Variable mystery (Govinda 2009)
  5. Re: [WebDNA] Variable mystery (Brian Fries 2009)
  6. Re: [WebDNA] Variable mystery (Kenneth Grome 2009)
  7. Re: [WebDNA] Variable mystery (Frank Nordberg 2009)
  8. Re: [WebDNA] Variable mystery (Kenneth Grome 2009)
  9. Re: [WebDNA] Variable mystery (Frank Nordberg 2009)
  10. Re: [WebDNA] Variable mystery (Donovan Brooke 2009)
  11. Re: [WebDNA] Variable mystery (Govinda 2009)
  12. Re: [WebDNA] Variable mystery (Terry Wilson 2009)
  13. Re: [WebDNA] Variable mystery (Frank Nordberg 2009)
  14. Re: [WebDNA] Variable mystery (Donovan Brooke 2009)
  15. Re: [WebDNA] Variable mystery (Govinda 2009)
  16. [WebDNA] Variable mystery (Frank Nordberg 2009)
I'm with Ken though in that I too would want to see the code above the said [search] to determine what all may have been going on before settling for "bug" or "inexplicable-behavior-with-working-workaround". Many many times in coding projects I knew very well all the pieces, but not so well the wholeness (semi-mess) I had created until later when more attention revealed the logic was always performing as it should have.. and it was own failing to think through every step that caused the issue. -G On Jun 3, 2009, at 9:28 AM, Brian Fries wrote: > Ken, you missed the earlier description of the problem wherein his > variable literally contains the square-bracketed name of another > variable, so yes the [interpret] was needed in this case. > > Brian Fries > BrainScan Software > > > On Jun 3, 2009, at 7:02 AM, Kenneth Grome wrote: > >>>> The interpret should not be required when that code is >>>> inside a search context. >>> >>> It shouldn't? >> >> No of course not. Normally you need an interpret context >> only when the tag or context would *not* be interpreted -- >> but [variable] tags are always interpreted by default -- >> unless something prevents it of course ... >> >> There is a preference settings that can affect [variable] >> interpretation, but I don't think many people change, it so >> this is probably not an issue for you anyways. >> >> It must be something you're doing in the code above that >> search context that's preventing the tag from being >> interpreted normally. >> >> >>> The problem definitely went away when I added that >>> interpet context and I didn't make any other changes at >>> that point. >> >> I guess that's all that matters in the grand scheme of >> things anyways ... :) >> >> Sincerely, >> Ken Grome >> > old archives: http://dev.webdna.us/TalkListArchive/ Govinda

DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!

Top Articles:

Talk List

The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...

Related Readings:

where to put code (1998) quick GREP question (2001) Ongoing group search problems ... (1997) mass mailing (1998) Stat analyzer (1997) Making Thumbnail Graphics (1997) Migrating to NT -Reply (1997) Bug? (1997) Firesite cache vs webcat cache (1997) emailer (1997) problems with 2 tags (1997) Document Contains No Data! (1997) This list needs a digest: rant, rave... (1997) Garbage files created -METOO (2000) WebCatalog for guestbook ? (1997) [include ...] behavior (1997) Emailer help....! (1997) vars (2000) Mac: LModelDirector bug fix (1997) RE: Can a database get stomped by simultaneous access? (1997)