Search results for query: *

I've tried it with versions 6,8 and 9 - same results. And I wouldn't be so sure about the code working without variables. It all depends how long the variable is (and how many decimal places you want to show with SET DECIMALS) While testing different numbers and different values for SET...

Stella740pl, the problem may be easier to understand here: SET DECIMALS TO 18 l_nNewValue = 4.9811 ? l_nNewValue && 4.981100000000000000 / CORRECT ? l_nNewValue * 10 && 49.810999999999990000 / INCORRECT The same with: SET DECIMAL TO 18 ? 4.9811 * 10*10 && 498.109999999999900000...

To extend my answer, if you show the data in lets say MyGrid in columns AccountColumn, AmountColumn and PercentColumn (this one is an additional one), simply do: In the Form.MyGrid.AmountColumn.Text1.Valid put: SUM ALL amount TO lnTotalSum THISFORM.MyGrid.PercentColumn.Refresh() Then in the...

Question: Do you need to store the percentage in the table ? If it needs to be calculated on-the-fly, then a single change to one row will force you to replace percentage in ALL rows. If you really need to do it that way, then I believe the fastests way would be: SELECT mytable SUM ALL...

Hello all, last week I've started working with VFP9 (after working with 6 & 8) and I am really happy with the product. I've decided to change the structure of one table, a table which was created a long time ago and has pretty bad structure. This is the structure of the table: Field Field...

Ok, found it - and it even fixed my problem with VFP8. The function is called CREATEBINARY() :) Thanks for all your help and for pointing me into the right direction :)

And to answer the question. It doesn't work when you add CHR(0) in front/back nor add "0h" to the string (that's the way VFP9 marks a BLOB/VarBinary type) I believe VFP8 doesn't fully support BLOBs - that's why there is a problem with processing them. Also - is there a way to FORCE variable to...

I found that the string I was receiving was of VarBinary/BLOB type which is somewhat supported by VFP8 (the code doesn't even work in VFP6). I did test it with VFP9 Beta and the TYPE() function returned 'Q'.

Well - I found a solution to my problem, but it is EXTREMLY weird! When I do this: lcDummyPart = LEFT(gcPublicKey,0) && Add 0 bytes from the Dummy Key lcGoodKeyPart = SUBSTR(vaPublicKey, 1) && Append it with the good key gcPublicKeyFinal = lcDummyPart + lcGoodKeyPart The gcPublicKeyFinal...

Hello All, I've encountered a weird problem while trying to make a Xceed Encryption Library v1.1 work (an ActiveX dll). I know they say on the web site, that it doesn't support VFP, but I believe there is a way to make it work :) Anyway, my problem is as follow - in short (and making it...

I've tested in on two different computers, with three different tables - the same result. Using SEEK ... ORDER ... DESCENDING gives two different results in VFP6 and VFP8. In VFP6 the table has the index in a descending order (even without using the SET ORDER TO .. DESCENDING to start with)...

I did answer that :) (look on the screenshots :) In both situations the NEAR and EXACT are OFF

Nah, I did put the same ones :) The window in VFP8 was cut :) I copy&paste the code I've used in VFP8 into VFP6 and run it from the Command Window, so the code was identical.

Both ar OFF. Here are links to two screenshots of the BROWSE window taken in both VFP8 and VFP6. They show two different results after performing the same operation on them. VFP6: http://gothic.sitenet.pl/vfp6.jpg VFP8: http://gothic.sitenet.pl/vfp8.jpg Any ideas what could have been wrong ?

Nope, not really - as far as I've tested, the same table is being used. I've followed the code with a BROWSE window open and it turned out that after performing the first SEEK lcCountyValue ORDER cty_owner DESCENDING we get two different results in VFP6 and VFP8 In VFP6, the field county looks...

My fault, I was upset about the not working code and I made a hastly mistake with the help :) But it doesn't change the fact, that the code didn't work with VFP8. Only the mentioned change had restored its proper behaviour. So, what was the cause for VFP8 to stop working ?

Ok, I believe I found the problem .. SEEK was changed in the 8.0 (comparing to 6.0) SEEK in VFP 6.0 SEEK eExpression [ORDER nIndexNumber | IDXIndexFileName | [TAG] TagName [OF CDXFileName] [ASCENDING | DESCENDING]] [IN nWorkArea | cTableAlias] SEEK in VFP 8.0 SEEK(eExpression [...

Hello, I've encountered a weird behaviour of VFP 8.0. I do not know how to explain it, but code which was working just fine under 6.0 no longer performs as it should with the VFP 8.0. The purpose of the code is to get all unique values from the table (without using SQL SELECT) - it uses the...

Brian, so why does the INDEX ON county TAG county works fine ? I know that the VFP has to perform more operations while using concatenated indexes, but I wouldn't suspect it takes that much time. According to Special Edition Using VFP 6...

Ramani, still slow :( it took 1.5 minutes to find a little bit over 50k records. Here's the real code I use: * First, close all open tables CLOSE TABLES ALL * Open the table we're using for testing USE c:\tmp\test001.dbf * Use the concatenated index (County + OwnerLName) SET ORDER TO...