Talk:Global Functions: Difference between revisions

From Legacy Roblox Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
>Camoy
No edit summary
>Sncplay42
No edit summary
Line 13: Line 13:
:::I am serious, and _G is functional.  I never said anything about being fully functional.  It's definitely functional, though.<div style="border-style:dotted; border-width:0px; border-top-width:1px; border-color:#888888; padding-bottom:-4px;"><sup>Posted by [[:User:Blocco|blocco]] ([[:User_talk:Blocco|talk]]) on Sep 23, 2010 (Thursday) at 21:23 (UTC) [[:User talk:Blocco/sig#format|[Discuss format]]]</sup></div>
:::I am serious, and _G is functional.  I never said anything about being fully functional.  It's definitely functional, though.<div style="border-style:dotted; border-width:0px; border-top-width:1px; border-color:#888888; padding-bottom:-4px;"><sup>Posted by [[:User:Blocco|blocco]] ([[:User_talk:Blocco|talk]]) on Sep 23, 2010 (Thursday) at 21:23 (UTC) [[:User talk:Blocco/sig#format|[Discuss format]]]</sup></div>
::::They made _G like the shared table except its named _G?  Is the shared table still up? <sup><small><font color="grey">[[User:Camoy|Camoy]] &bull; [[Special:Contributions/Camoy|Contribs]] (September 23 2010)</font></small></sup>
::::They made _G like the shared table except its named _G?  Is the shared table still up? <sup><small><font color="grey">[[User:Camoy|Camoy]] &bull; [[Special:Contributions/Camoy|Contribs]] (September 23 2010)</font></small></sup>
:::::Yes it is. --[[User:Sncplay42|SNCPlay42]] 21:27, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:27, 23 September 2010

_G is no longer available. Is this not correct? CamoyContribs (September 23 2010)

It works fine if you put _G. before writing to and reading from it. --SNCPlay42 21:18, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
_G is available. And it is functional.
_G.x=9
repeat wait() until _G.x; local x=_G.x; print(x)
Posted by blocco (talk) on Sep 23, 2010 (Thursday) at 21:20 (UTC) [Discuss format]
Are you serious blocco? CamoyContribs (September 23 2010)
Can you do this:
Example
_G.foo = "bar"
print(foo) -- bar

CamoyContribs (September 23 2010)

No, that's the only functionality that's removed. --SNCPlay42 21:23, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
I am serious, and _G is functional. I never said anything about being fully functional. It's definitely functional, though.
Posted by blocco (talk) on Sep 23, 2010 (Thursday) at 21:23 (UTC) [Discuss format]
They made _G like the shared table except its named _G? Is the shared table still up? CamoyContribs (September 23 2010)
Yes it is. --SNCPlay42 21:27, 23 September 2010 (UTC)