8 hours ago
(This post was last modified: 7 hours ago by CookieOscar.)
My 0.000002 cents for what it's worth:
Cool!
So, what about:
Redim C().B(20, 50) as String
or even:
Redim C.B(20, 50) as String
Could that redim ALL B() arrays of ALL existing elements of C()?
Or is that taking it too far?
PS: I think I've never had the need to have an array inside an array/UDT inside an UDT like that before though. But very cool if all this would become possible (as long as there is no additional overhead in the underlying C++ code when not used -- especially speed wise)! The most complex I ever had the need for was a dynamic array (with fixed number of dimensions) of a build-in type inside an UDT.
PSS: Make sure you touch grass from time to time. Loosing your mind is no bueno
(10 hours ago)Petr Wrote: ...I assume this only redims B() in the 0 indexed element of C(), and not any other B() array from other existing C() elements?
Redim C(0).B(20, 50) as String
...
Cool!
So, what about:
Redim C().B(20, 50) as String
or even:
Redim C.B(20, 50) as String
Could that redim ALL B() arrays of ALL existing elements of C()?
Or is that taking it too far?
PS: I think I've never had the need to have an array inside an array/UDT inside an UDT like that before though. But very cool if all this would become possible (as long as there is no additional overhead in the underlying C++ code when not used -- especially speed wise)! The most complex I ever had the need for was a dynamic array (with fixed number of dimensions) of a build-in type inside an UDT.
PSS: Make sure you touch grass from time to time. Loosing your mind is no bueno
Who remembers QB30, GWBASIC, C64, ZX80?

