Why?

[Kenneth Brody]

George Simon wrote:
> 
> Ken, if I call the table from the output processing table, hasn't the
> automatic processing table already executed all its code before the output
> processing even begins?

I thought you said @ONCE?  But, yes, if you call it from the actual output
processing, then automatic has been executed by then.  However, you have
still changed the sequence of events leading up the the execution of the
statement that is causing the crash in the original situation.

> And if so, why is it that whatever line is causing the error to occur when
> the table is called from automatic, does not have any effect when the table
> is called from the output processing table?

Because by changing processing, you have changed what's in memory where,
and you have changed the sequence of events.  Without having the files to
duplicate it with, there is no way for me to answer the question with any
more detail.  For all I know, line 87 of automatic processing causes some
memory to be corrupted, but line 963 causes something else to happen that
makes that corruption irrelevent.

> The only difference I see is that one line (the one that calls the table) is
> remarked out from the automatic table.
> I just don't understand, I guess.
[...]

-- 
+-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+
| Kenneth J. Brody        | www.hvcomputer.com |                             |
| kenbrody at spamcop.net | www.fptech.com     | #include <std_disclaimer.h> |
+-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+