A question generated by the "pig"

[CDAY]

John,

Using either the 4.8 or 5.x lines, all works perfectly 
running ver. 5.0.14 Dclerk on XP ver. 5.1.2600.

It does NOT function running Rclerk
the screen appears, the prompts at bottom do NOT display, 
T  does nothing,  X  exits the screen.

Charlie Day






John Esak wrote:
> Hello pig lovers... :-),
> 
> Well, I've got a really strange one today. I hope to contact fp support
> and/or Ken directly via email or phone today about this, but I was hoping
> for a little more confirmation first.  Actually, many, many  of you have now
> bought the "Pig in a Poke" code.  I have spoken with lots of you in the FP
> Room and on the phone, and I've gotten lots of emails.   It has all been so
> positive and fun because everyone is so excited about having  this process
> at their fingertips, ready to drop in to their own programs and have it work
> for them in their own unique ways. (yes, I know a shameless plug... but,
> I've always been influenced by the "Car Guys". :-)
> 
> Meanwhile, the real reason for this note... One, just one of the many
> Windows sites had a problem. I haven't heard the slightest hiccough over the
> *nix stuff yet, but that is why I am asking here and now.  Anyway, on this
> particular XP SP2 site, I had to Remote Desktop in and fix it up. After
> quite a long time, about 40 minutes, and some accidental printing of the
> input table the person was using... I kept forgetting that I was using dcabe
> and hitting Y, Y as if I was in rcabe!  Yikes, he must have had hardcopy all
> around his place... :-)  Sorry... :-)   Well, I finally found the problem.
> He had correctly commented out the 4.8 processing lines (all two of them)
> and uncommented the 5.0 processing lines (the same just two of them).  I
> hadn't realized this at first, and the table kept blowing up.  It kept
> blowing up in that horrible way that just dumps you back to the calling
> command with no error at all.  Very frustrating!
> 
> I don't remember exactly how and where, but I managed to put in a "debug on"
> and some breakpoints in that showed the error before dumping me out to the
> real world.  It turns out that the variable "BrowseFile" which I use on the
> lookup browse line was mysteriously and for absolutely NO reason becoming
> null... cleared, BLANK!!!  God, I was happy to find this, because I knew
> right away it was the problem of having three declare'd variables or more on
> the browse lookup line that was causing this.    I simply put back the 4.8
> version of the lines involved, all two of them, and uncommented the two 5.+
> version lines, and the thing started working perfectly, as it should.
> 
> The impossible thing to understand is that this system happens to be a
> 5.0.14 system. At least that is what PFVER says when you go into  dclerk!
> How can it work on umpteen 5.0.14 systems perfectly as always, but not on
> this one particular system.   So, I guess I'm asking all of you who have the
> code to try it out with the two 5.0 lines instead of the 4.8 lines (which is
> the way I sent it out by default).  I didn't want this old bug biting anyone
> up front, so I felt using the 4.8 method as the default would be smartest.
> This one case just happens the person saw the 5.0 lines and correctly
> uncommented them and commented out the 4.8 ones as he should have done.
> 
> Now, I just thought of one tiny thing... although I can't believe it to be
> true, or even to be the cause, but it might... What if his dclerk was 5.014
> as it read so clearly and his dcabe was 4.8 or something like that?  Would
> this cause the multiple declare'd variables on a browse lookup to fail at
> runtime???   Sir, and you know who you are, can you check your dcabe for me
> when and if you see this?  Meanwhile, I'll give you a call about it also.
> But in the case of curiosity and my sanity, I would love to know if anyone
> experiences this same problem  with the two lines of 5.0 code and a new
> 5.0.14 system. I would be amazed if you do because I had debugged and
> pre-tested this code for days before putting it out with a gentleman in
> Australia who worked it over thoroughly on his 5.0.14 XP system. Since
> finding this strangeness yesterday, I've managed to get confirmation that
> several other XP 5.014 systems work fine, too.  But it certainly does NOT
> work on the one in question... so what gives? Getting more feedback would be
> great. Just let's double check, because how could one person's system do it
> and not others. Either the bug has been fixed or it hasn't, right?
> 
> By the way, I thoroughly checked the environment of the machine and saw
> nothing strange. This gentleman is willing to have FP Tech  login with RDP
> and see what I saw, he or I can make those arrangements if that can happen.
> 
> So let us know, now that lots of you have the code... try it out as the demo
> and just chime in if there is anything odd at all. I don't expect it, but
> then, you never know.
> 
> 
> John Esak
> Visit The FP Room www.tinyurl.com/yuag7 24/7
> 
> Take a demo ride on "the pig" at www.valar.com/single you'll be happy you
> did. There is a movie describing the whole thing.
> 
> .
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Filepro-list mailing list
> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
>