On Mon, 5 Feb 2001, Gustaf Neumann wrote:
i have to admit, that i do not fully understand the problem. the following seems to satisfy your needs:
the other approach is to make init more clever. i read a hint from your mail, that you want to have different constructors for different parameters ("overloading similar to c++"). What's wrong with a switch in init handling these cases:
Well this is exactly the approach I'm using. Just that I was slightly surprised I couldn't control it with [next] by giving those object parameters to it as I would when creating an ob. It's OK now that I know that I can't do it. I can do it with other approaches quite easily in my code. I just wanted to be sure it's not something that's intended to work.
Btw. any ideas when 8.4 will be out? The bug with the destruction of objects and error handling is causing some small headaches in the debugging phase of code here. I really hate to pressure you like this, but I need to be able to look forward to a bright future when I get into that situation, so I can say "Oh, it'll be alright soon" when I stumble across that situation. No panics though.
- ---------- = = ---------//--+ | / Kristoffer Lawson | www.fishpool.fi|.com +-> | setok@fishpool.com | - - --+------ |-- Fishpool Creations Ltd - / | +-------- = - - - = --------- /~setok/