comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive: archive » Re: _Ref_Extra : BUG? (in Win2K 55b) corrected test file

Home » Public Forums » archive » Re: _Ref_Extra : BUG? (in Win2K 55b) corrected test file

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Re: _Ref_Extra : BUG? (in Win2K 55b) corrected test file [message #27739 is a reply to message #27738]

Thu, 01 November 2001 12:23

John-David T. Smith is currently offline

John-David T. Smith
Messages: 384
Registered: January 2000

Senior Member

Martin Downing wrote:
>
> Glad you didnt look too carefully, as the test file I sent was wrong
> nyway - thought I had sent it *before* I started changing things, woops :(
> I noticed though that the Keyword had been converted to a string on your
> version.
>
> The correct file is now on my web site, sorry - clearly not enough coffee
> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/martin.downing/idl/test_ref_ext ra_bug.pro
> code below:
> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/martin.downing/idl/test_ref_ext ra_bug2.pro
> the below test though is *maybe* easier to follow
>

It seems to me the point is being driven home that switching from
_REF_EXTRA to _EXTRA in the middle of the game is verboten: a _REF_EXTRA
stack should remain a _REF_EXTRA stack. Not sure I agree with the
method of their point-making.

Can you distill the problem to a simpler (and preferrably
non-pair-recursive) example?

JD

P.S. If you only use "_EXTRA" in your routine calls (as opposed to
routine *definitions*), this bug vanishes. I have always recommended
saving "_REF_EXTRA" only for the relevant function definitions which
would like to return values through their inherited keywords, and using
the simpler "_EXTRA" everywhere else.

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		Re: _Ref_Extra : BUG? (in Win2K 55b) corrected test file By: Mark Hadfield on Sun, 04 November 2001 12:54
		Re: _Ref_Extra : BUG? (in Win2K 55b) corrected test file By: John-David T. Smith on Fri, 02 November 2001 12:06
		Re: _Ref_Extra : BUG? (in Win2K 55b) corrected test file By: Martin Downing on Fri, 02 November 2001 01:59
		Re: _Ref_Extra : BUG? (in Win2K 55b) corrected test file By: Mark Hadfield on Thu, 01 November 2001 16:18
		Re: _Ref_Extra : BUG? (in Win2K 55b) corrected test file By: Martin Downing on Thu, 01 November 2001 15:30
		Re: _Ref_Extra : BUG? (in Win2K 55b) corrected test file By: Mark Hadfield on Thu, 01 November 2001 12:28
		Re: _Ref_Extra : BUG? (in Win2K 55b) corrected test file By: John-David T. Smith on Thu, 01 November 2001 12:23
		Re: _Ref_Extra : BUG? (in Win2K 55b) corrected test file By: Robert Stockwell on Thu, 01 November 2001 05:29
		Re: _Ref_Extra : BUG? (in Win2K 55b) corrected test file By: Martin Downing on Thu, 01 November 2001 09:00

Previous Topic:	Re: LINK : warning LNK4068: /MACHINE not specified; defaulting to IX86
Next Topic:	Re: texture_coord

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Wed Oct 08 15:12:13 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00320 seconds