Page 1 of 1

Dumb question, but . . .

Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 7:02 pm
by jcblough
What is the difference between '@=' and '='? I cannot find a single thing about them.

Re: Dumb question, but . . .

Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 7:06 pm
by ellissj3
@= is required when youre conducting a conditional statement to evaluate a string.

For Example:

if (<Current Version> @= 'Plan' );
Then ....
Endif;

Re: Dumb question, but . . .

Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 7:07 pm
by jcblough
I was thinking that was it, from code context, but was not sure - thanks!

Re: Dumb question, but . . .

Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 7:29 pm
by Alan Kirk
jcblough wrote:I was thinking that was it, from code context, but was not sure - thanks!
The multiple documentation files don't make it easy to find anything (especially as the installed help files still have to be searched separately despite Iboglix supposedly "taking onboard" what a bad design that is :evil: ), however this is the kind of question that you'll generally find the answer to in the Reference Guide. That's usually my first point of call for anything syntax related. In the case of this particular question you'll find it under the Comparison Operators in TM1 Rules heading.

Re: Dumb question, but . . .

Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 7:39 pm
by Alan Kirk
Alan Kirk wrote:
jcblough wrote:I was thinking that was it, from code context, but was not sure - thanks!
The multiple documentation files don't make it easy to find anything (especially as the installed help files still have to be searched separately despite Iboglix supposedly "taking onboard" what a bad design that is :evil: )
As an aside, which genius at Iboglix decided to deploy the 10.1 online documentation under an HTTPS protocol instead of the HTTP one that the 9.5 documentatation used? They aren't secured documents, and so the principal "benefit" seems to be that you get an unending series of "Security Warnings" from Internet Explorer asking "Do you want to view only the web page content that was delivered securely? This webpage contains content that will not be delivered using a secure HTTPS connection," (well duh, it's not supposed to be secured) " which could compromise the security of the entire webpage."

Cheers lads, another software architecture triumph for IBM, which really understands how to put a web site together.

(Put HTML code inside a paintball gun and fire it at a wall, is I believe the preferred method.)