| |
| |
|
 | Have in current V0.1.6i time one experimentelles feature umgesetzt:
CompileMarkSeparationinstead of
CompileMarkSeparationThe Parameterdefinition can now then in the same row erfolgen in the too The Proc definiert becomes, simply with clinging umschließen. Erstere spelling feel I as less umständlich and it type itself too leichter from the hand - and becomes into most Languages likewise apply.
naturally goes in the Ramen the Unitsupports too yet:
CompileMarkSeparation |
|
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Jac
de
Lad | | and How wärs with endproc i$ in lieu of of Return i$ ... endproc ??? |
|
| |
| Profan² 2.6 bis XProfan 11.1+XPSE+XPIA+XPRR (und irgendwann XIDE)
Core2Duo E8500/T2250, 8192/1024 MB, Radeon HD4850/Radeon XPress 1250, Vista64/XP | 10/15/06 ▲ |
|
| |
|
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Rolf
Koch | Jo, I voice iF with Nööö To  ,
because its still integrally simply, there one Return still too within of/ one Proc through inquire zurückgegeben go can z.B.:
CompileMarkSeparation |
|
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Jac
de
Lad | Yes, this is clear, but since usually The Returnwerte end transfer go, fänd ichs meaningfully.
@iF: Tus for me, biddäääähhh!  |
|
| |
| Profan² 2.6 bis XProfan 11.1+XPSE+XPIA+XPRR (und irgendwann XIDE)
Core2Duo E8500/T2250, 8192/1024 MB, Radeon HD4850/Radeon XPress 1250, Vista64/XP | 10/16/06 ▲ |
|
| |
|
|
Nico
Madysa | iFs suggested spelling find I thoroughly meaningfully, but I personally would tappt im dunkeln not umsetzen, there my Procedures mostly at all no Parameter having or your function from the Parameters depending.
nevertheless, as feature for XPSE I find it überaus meaningfully.  |
|
| |
| |
| |
|
(946)
Deutsch
English
Français
Español
Italia