|
|
Posted by Oli Filth on 03/19/06 03:09
Onideus Mad Hatter said the following on 18/03/2006 14:23:
> On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 13:55:21 GMT, Oli Filth <catch@olifilth.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> square._x = eval("dates._"+i+"._x") + 566;
>>>
>> - it can *only* be used
>> to reference variables/objects via a string; it can't evaluate arbitrary
>> code.
>
> Are you saying this from experience or did you just read it somewhere?
Having never used ActionScript, I can't check either way. But the
following search would indicate that I'm right (neglecting the Wiki entry):
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=actionscript+javascript+eval
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=actionscript+javascript+eval
If all of these are wrong, I'll have to take your word for it!
>> P.S.
>> As to your subject line, if you're referring to that time when you were
>> attempting to justify:
>>
>> eval(a + b)
>
> I wasn't attempting to justify anything. You were the one making the
> claim that the eval function had absolutely no use.
I don't remember ever claiming that. At the time [1], I was
demonstrating to you that the use of eval() in that *particular*
situation was of less than no use.
> I found proof that refutes your claim and now you're all
> like, "Oh wait, no wait...it's just in PHP and Javascript that it
> doesn't do anything."
Well, even if that were my original claim (which it wasn't), and if (for
the sake of argument) A.S eval() doesn't evaluate code, then you're
comparing apples and oranges - just because two functions have the same
name doesn't mean they're the same function.
[1]
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.2600/browse_frm/thread/9111ed87e8d9dd93/9056cacabcace9f7
--
Oli
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|