Support,

Might I make a suggestion......

If someone is passing a map variable to a function and this user wants to test his map input he HAS TO RE-FORMAT his map variable to comply with your proprietary format.. Example..

A default ZC map funtion outputted to string is valid JSON..

{"key1 : "value1","key2" : "value2", "key3" : "value3"}

BUT if I want to test my map argument I have to reformat my map to be like this.

{"key1","value1"},{"key2","value2"},{"key3","value3"}

My thought is that you were thinking this would help the user but it really doesn't! Here' s why.

1. You confuse the user, who sees one output the right way, but then has to re-input it another way.

2. You make it harder for users to test there arguement.. I often use the getFieldNames and getFieldValues  to create a "fieldMap" that I send to a function (an easy way to send all the variables to a function quickly). 

If I am having issues with the function I usually just throw an info log on the form to get the map output. BUT, instead of just being able to throw the output into my function argument I HAVE TO RE-FORMAT IT!

It's not to hard to do. I just use a text editor to find and replace/re-format. However, it's annnoying.

Anyways, just a suggestion.

Also, when are map()'s going to handle variable types better? Thank you !