Design of programming toolsets (was: Re: FW: Browse lookup - oddbehavior)

[John Esak]

>
> > As John said, adding a drop to the browse will solve the problem.
>
> Will it?  I assumed you actually *needed* the records deleted.

If you continue to show that you completely misunderstand what we are
talking about here... please just drop out of this thread yourself. DROP ALL
would be even better. :-)  It's pretty obvious you really have no idea what
is under discussion. The records _do_ get deleted by whatever user.... the
"pkeep" mechanism does work _perfectly_ without fail if one just adds the
required "DROP" to the prc stub. Your comment is utterly ridiculous.

>
> > This does not entail jumping through programming hoops and acts as
> > insurance against an errant detail line being displayed.
>
> If it works for you, fine.  Glad to hear it.

Funny thing, Jay, it works for everyone... it would even work for you, if
you had the 12 seconds of time it would take to try it. Of course, no one
would expect you to actually investigate what it is we are talking about at
any point. Just keep throwing up the nonsense... eventually, sooner than
later, I would guess, most everyone will get really tired of it.... but not
be... when you put up the bullshit, I'll clarify for everyone... keep it
coming... this thread will be killed by 99% percent of the people who were
reading it... which is usually your goal (seemingly). Too bad, this was a
very important point that Richard brought out and many people would benefit
from the solution to what otherwise could be a problem. One that, indeed,
gave him grief until the complete syntax for the "pkeep" was introduced.

> It *doesn't* take fpTech off this particular hook, however.  ;-)

There is NO hook other than your incorrect estimation of the situation...
need I add, the "as always". This is getting very old, Jay.

You do things like put up bad code (i.e.,. how exactly not to use UPDATE)
then you smirk and say "I almost got it right...."  Yeah, very funny... Then
you mention how wasting the developer's _valuable_ time is SO bad. You don't
think the guy's time you wasted with your improper posting about UPDATE (and
it's obvious underlying complete misunderstanding of what UPDATE does...)
wasn't the same kind of "waste". Oooh, I forgot, it must just be _your_ time
that can be wasted... everyone else is here to dangle at your whim, i.e.,
the pkeep misunderstanding you are now foisting on everyone... same deal.
Get the some clue of what's going on first, then perhaps you might make some
meaningful comments. (Though somehow I doubt it...) Is that knee-jerk enough
for you?  Hope so, always aim to please.

John

P.S. - Oh yeah, as to your not having a "manual"... printed was it??  The
full manual has been available online to registered users for years and
years now. Don't have a registered copy??  Don't have the urge to be a
little more informed on the subject you are always waxing so boisterously on
about being poorly designed?  Do us all a favor, get it, read it and come
back in 4 or 5 years... maybe we'll all be gone by then. We should be so
lucky.