Re: Unexpected comparison behavior change in 4.5.1
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2003
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 48762
interpreted = N
texte = Your description is inconclusive. If I was checking for b, then, to paraphrase you:What your comparison is saying IF bob contains b then true. bob contains bob therefore is false in both cases.This is not a test for equality, and bob contains NOTHING an infinite number of times.Again, I'm not saying that one result is better than the other - logically it's an inconclusive test. What I am saying is that, since it's inconclusive, it SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN CHANGED WITHOUT GOOD REASON AND WITHOUT NOTIFYING DEVELOPERS THAT THEIR CODE MIGHT BREAK.SMSI: Comments? Scott? Please?- brianOn Tuesday, March 18, 2003, at 12:47  AM, Charles Kline wrote:> What your comparison is saying IF bob contains NOTHING then true. bob > contains bob therefore is false in both cases.>> On Tuesday, March 18, 2003, at 01:56 AM, Brian Fries wrote:>>> On Monday, March 17, 2003, at 10:38  PM, Charles Kline wrote:>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, March 18, 2003, at 01:32 AM, Brian Fries wrote:>>>>>>> [showif bob^]>>>>>>>> or>>>>>>>> [if bob^]>>>>>>>>>>>> In my tests, these evaluate to true under 4.5.0 and earlier, and >>>> to false under 4.5.1. Clearly URL is not the issue here.>>>>>>> [showif bob^] should evaluate to 'false' so it seems the bug was in >>> 4.5.0>>>> And WHY should [showif bob^] evaluate false? I don't see anything in >> the empty string that isn't also in bob, therefore I - and every >> version of WebDNA prior to 4.5.1 - would expect it to evaluate to > >> true.>>>>>>>> [if bob^] should evaluate to 'false' as well.>>>>>>> Again, why is false any better than true for this? If WebDNA were >> being written from scratch, then it would be the right time to make a >> choice on this. But, since it's worked the same way since I began >> using the product in 1997, I think its a little late to make this >> change.>>>> I'm not really here to debate which way it SHOULD resolve the >> comparison, I'm only here to point out that it broke my code - which >> was fully tested and had been working fine for years.>>>>> It was always my understanding that when using [if] to compare >>> strings, they needed to be in quotes. Was in the docs. as that from >>> the beginning.>>>>>>> Relevance? What quotes do you see missing from my example?>>>> - brian-------------------------------------------------------------This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to  the mailing list 
.To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
Your description is inconclusive. If I was checking for b, then, to paraphrase you:What your comparison is saying IF bob contains b then true. bob contains bob therefore is false in both cases.This is not a test for equality, and bob contains NOTHING an infinite number of times.Again, I'm not saying that one result is better than the other - logically it's an inconclusive test. What I am saying is that, since it's inconclusive, it SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN CHANGED WITHOUT GOOD REASON AND WITHOUT NOTIFYING DEVELOPERS THAT THEIR CODE MIGHT BREAK.SMSI: Comments? Scott? Please?- brianOn Tuesday, March 18, 2003, at 12:47  AM, Charles Kline wrote:> What your comparison is saying IF bob contains NOTHING then true. bob > contains bob therefore is false in both cases.>> On Tuesday, March 18, 2003, at 01:56 AM, Brian Fries wrote:>>> On Monday, March 17, 2003, at 10:38  PM, Charles Kline wrote:>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, March 18, 2003, at 01:32 AM, Brian Fries wrote:>>>>>>> [showif bob^]>>>>>>>> or>>>>>>>> [if bob^]>>>>>>>>>>>> In my tests, these evaluate to true under 4.5.0 and earlier, and >>>> to false under 4.5.1. Clearly URL is not the issue here.>>>>>>> [showif bob^] should evaluate to 'false' so it seems the bug was in >>> 4.5.0>>>> And WHY should [showif bob^] evaluate false? I don't see anything in >> the empty string that isn't also in bob, therefore I - and every >> version of WebDNA prior to 4.5.1 - would expect it to evaluate to > >> true.>>>>>>>> [if bob^] should evaluate to 'false' as well.>>>>>>> Again, why is false any better than true for this? If WebDNA were >> being written from scratch, then it would be the right time to make a >> choice on this. But, since it's worked the same way since I began >> using the product in 1997, I think its a little late to make this >> change.>>>> I'm not really here to debate which way it SHOULD resolve the >> comparison, I'm only here to point out that it broke my code - which >> was fully tested and had been working fine for years.>>>>> It was always my understanding that when using [if] to compare >>> strings, they needed to be in quotes. Was in the docs. as that from >>> the beginning.>>>>>>> Relevance? What quotes do you see missing from my example?>>>> - brian-------------------------------------------------------------This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to  the mailing list .To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/
Brian Fries 
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:
 
WebCatalog NT beta 18 problem (1997)
 
cookie length (1998)
 
RE: Help name our technology! (1997)
 
Re:no [search] with NT (1997)
 
WebDNA Writer Needed (1997)
 
Multiple download orders of the same product? (1997)
 
WebCat2b13MacPlugIn - [include] doesn't allow creator (1997)
 
Further tests with the infamous shipCost (1997)
 
WebCat2b14MacPlugIn - [include] doesn't hide the search string (1997)
 
[TaxableTotal] - not working with AOL and IE (1997)
 
WC2b12: Yes, Formulas.db is for real (1997)
 
[WebDNA] variable name limit - clarification (2009)
 
Questions To Answer (1997)
 
OT: Verbose messages - Web*4.2 (2000)
 
NT Setup (1998)
 
protect tag on NT IIS (1997)
 
 Image editing in browser (2005)
 
 urls (2005)
 
Version f1 status (1997)
 
A multi-processor savvy WebCatalog? (1997)