browse keys (@bk)

[Jay R. Ashworth]

On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 09:08:12PM -0400, John Esak wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 08:45:13PM -0400, John Esak wrote:
> > > want case insensitivity to be the default and not otherwise. The _vast_
> > > majority of people out there type in "smi" at an index key
> > prompt in IUA and
> > > they would be _very_ upset if they weren't brought to the first "SMITH"
> > > record should one exist.
> >
> > If you can build an index on a '*' column populated by all upper case
> > data, type 'smi' into it, and get anywhere, you let me know, John.
> 
> Excuse me?  Ummm, I can do that any day of the week and twice on Sunday...

I'm pretty sure you're wrong, here.

> also, I was referring to the index-key question in the index dialog box in
> IUA. Are you asking about data entry into the field itself?  In which case,
> what you are suggesting isn't possible, IS most certainly possible ALSO.
> Your comment here is completely non-understandable to me... what exactly do
> you think would NOT work if one typed "smi" into just about anyplace in
> filePro related to an index built on an * data type... (filled with all
> UPPER CASE data) or not?  Maybe you should try some of this stuff out before
> you post these messages, Jay. Either that or be more clear about what it is
> you want me to let you know about... because, uh, in this case, at least,
> you seem pretty confused.

[ runs test ]

Ok, *now* I'm just disgusted.

WARNING, to anyone remaining who might expect sane behavior: indexes on
* format fields are case insensitive, too.

What John says above is in fact accurate.

> > What you *actually* mean here is building an index on a column that the
> > programmer *consciously* forced to uppercase, which, as Mark correctly
> > noted, is a completely different thing.
> 
> heesh, the worst thing you could do is try and say what *I* actually mean,
> when you are so unclear about what you yourself are saying. I was not
> referring to anything Mark said, nor does it apply to any of this... nor
> does it apply at all to your comment above about not being able to use "smi"
> to find something in an index with ALLUP data... Try stating all this again
> in some way that makes sense and I'll test it out and try and understand
> what you mean... but with the stuff you've just put here, it all is pretty
> inscrutable.

No.  The problem is that I continue to expect sane behavior out of
filePro despite all the continuing evidence to the contrary.

You asserted that "smi" would locate a record with a '*' field
containing 'SMITH'.  It turns out you're right, which is *completely*
unconscionable.

You may not *like* or *agree* with my appraisals of and opinions about
filePro's implementation design decisions, John, but I've been
programming professionally in 4 or 5 languages for 20 years: I am
entitled to hold those opinions.

I'm giving up now. I really don't feel the need to be involved with
a package that's designed so differently from every other procedural
programming on the planet that it allows me to look foolish once a week,
saying "oh, they couldn't possibly be so dumb as to have made it work
like *that*; that's crazy stuff.

Bye, folks.

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                                                jra at baylink.com
Designer                          Baylink                             RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates        The Things I Think                        '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA      http://baylink.pitas.com             +1 727 647 1274

	"You know: I'm a fan of photosynthesis as much as the next guy,
	but if God merely wanted us to smell the flowers, he wouldn't 
	have invented a 3GHz microprocessor and a 3D graphics board."
					-- Luke Girardi