question about This

[Matt Neuburg]

On Thu, 16 May 2002 16:42:32 -0400, Brian V Hughes <brianvh at Dartmouth.EDU>
said:
>When I do exactly the same thing, it works perfectly for me. I see
>the fully qualified address to the tools script.

You are not doing exactly the same thing. If you were, you'd see the
problem. I didn't say this was a perfectly innocent ordinary default site;
I said I could make a site where the problem arises. I could tell you how
to do the same thing, but I don't see the point; the fact would remain that
I get this message and that, in my view, I shouldn't. The name "this"
should never be undefined in a script. m.

>--On 05/16/2002, Matt Neuburg wrote:
>>It should, but to paraphrase Hume, there's no way to get from "ought" to
>>"is". I am looking straight at a page object which calls a macro consisting
>>solely of a call to a tools script that goes:
>>
>>    return this
>>
>>When I publish this page statically, I get the address of the tools script.
>>When I publish it through mainresponder, dynamically, I get:
>>
>>    [Macro error: Can't evaluate the expression because the name "this"
>>hasn't been defined.]
>>
>>I feel there should not ever be a time when I get a message like that, and
>>that I've found a bug. m.
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 3

-- 

matt neuburg, phd = matt at tidbits.com, http://www.tidbits.com/matt
pantes gar anthropoi tou eidenai oregontai phusei
Subscribe to TidBITS! It's free and smart. http://www.tidbits.com/