Yes, the current behavior fooled me a while back, but the forum explained why.
Thinking of this as a Macro action is more intuitive.
Hazard warning: hidden macro
Re: Hazard warning: hidden macro
I seem to have read this same thread before so I vote for Manual update as freak suggests.
Yes, the current behavior fooled me a while back, but the forum explained why.
Thinking of this as a Macro action is more intuitive.
Yes, the current behavior fooled me a while back, but the forum explained why.
Thinking of this as a Macro action is more intuitive.
The nice thing about standards is there are so many to choose from. ~ Andrew Tanenbaum
-
Joakim Christiansen
- Addict
- Posts: 2452
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 4:12 pm
- Location: Norway
- Contact:
Re: Hazard warning: hidden macro
I was the one who screamed bug btw! 
Mostly because I think such language behavior seems unproductive and will fool many people into producing code that doesn't work as they intended and then actually CAUSE bugs in their program! So yeah, by being a little harsh I try to make people understand the seriousness of this in what is called a "basic" language...
Mostly because I think such language behavior seems unproductive and will fool many people into producing code that doesn't work as they intended and then actually CAUSE bugs in their program! So yeah, by being a little harsh I try to make people understand the seriousness of this in what is called a "basic" language...
I like logic, hence I dislike humans but love computers.
Re: Hazard warning: hidden macro
Uh.
*opening a long forgotten code*
...
*checking a few lines*
...
yeah, that's why. ( ≧Д≦)
*opening a long forgotten code*
...
*checking a few lines*
...
yeah, that's why. ( ≧Д≦)