It's been like this since A4. If you understand how the code is executed, you'll see why. For example, follow the numbers in "()"s (1,2,3, etc):

Code:

function gimme_a_return()  // << (3) this function was called
{
  return_value = 2;   // << (4) return value is given a value
  wait(-1);           // << (5) this function is on hold for one frame,
                      // so control is returned to the calling function 

  return(return_value); // << (8) We're back after waiting a frame,
                        // we return a value but, since the calling function
                        // has already continued without us, we just 
                        // throw away this value.
}

function test_the_return()  // << (1) If you call this function first
{
  test_return = gimme_a_return(); // << (2) gimme_a_return is called...
                                  // << (6) gimme_a_return was put on hold
                                  // before it got to its return value so
                                  // test_return is assigned the wait value
}  // << (7) This fuction is finished




Quote:

So I guess I gotta do the work around, caus I need the wait. (Caus there is a while loop in the function, so there is automaticly a wait(1); )



While loops don't always need waits. It is perfectly legal to do something like this:

Code:

i = 0;
while(i<20)
{
   i += 1;
}


Just remember that without the wait, everything happens in one frame so you need to be sure that your loop isn't too big (otherwise things will slow down a lot).

Conitec's Free Resources:
User Magazine || Docs and Tutorials || WIKI