{{clientname}} vs. [[clientname]]

Post beta version feedback on MainLobby releases
Big Bob
Intermediate
Intermediate
Posts: 289
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 1:01 pm
Contact:

{{clientname}} vs. [[clientname]]

Postby Big Bob » Sat Mar 11, 2006 8:39 am

I thought I had read a post/warning that we should start using {{clientname}} instead of [[clientname]] in button labels (of course now I can't find it), so I revised my labels accordingly. Now it appears as if "double-nested" variables using {{clientname}} no longer work as labels in MLS.

In 2.86 and early beta versions, I was using {{yamaha_{{jc_[[clientname]]_YamRecNum}}_z1input}} to track the currently selected input on the AVR and all worked fine. At some point I changes my scenes to reflect {{yamaha_{{jc_{{clientname}}_YamRecNum}}_z1input}} and it still worked fine - the last known beta this worked on was ML 2.92.

Under 2.95.1 this no longer works, but reverting back to {{yamaha_{{jc_[[clientname]]_YamRecNum}}_z1input}} does work.

Thanks

Joe

User avatar
gregoryx
Simply Incredible
Simply Incredible
Posts: 6599
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2003 10:15 pm
Location: Newport Beach, CA
Contact:

Postby gregoryx » Sat Mar 11, 2006 1:35 pm

Sounds the same as my finding: commands that worked with nested {{clientname}} ceased to work in 2.95.1. I didn't try the [[clientname]] variant. Good thinking!

Big Bob
Intermediate
Intermediate
Posts: 289
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 1:01 pm
Contact:

Postby Big Bob » Sat Mar 11, 2006 1:58 pm

Gregoryx

I think the nested clientname in a macro is a MLS problem - I had the same thing there, it worked in some beta versions of MLS and didn't work in others. FWIW, it's working for me now in MLS 2.0.184. Also, I never tried the [[clientname]] thing in the MLServeCmd field (at least I don't remember doing so).

Short reply - try MLS 2.0.184 and see if it fixes your problem, it fixed my other one.

Joe

User avatar
gregoryx
Simply Incredible
Simply Incredible
Posts: 6599
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2003 10:15 pm
Location: Newport Beach, CA
Contact:

Postby gregoryx » Sat Mar 11, 2006 2:45 pm

Huh... okay... I guess you are right... though it's weird that 2.95.1 didn't work with MLS2.0.180 but ML2.86p2 did... but ML2.95.1 does work with MLS2.0.184!

Something interesting in there... :?

Well, good news is that enough stuff works that I can now try ML1.95.1 on a Progear!


Return to “MainLobby Beta”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest