most recent records question

[John Esak]

> A record created by processing will have the same date in @cd
> and @bd, with @ud being empty.  A record created in IUA will
> have the same date in @cd and @ud, with @bd being empty.

Bob,
I think this is wrong... let me check... <checking> ... Yes, this is wrong.
The @ud field will only be filled in with @cd if the record is created
through a native IUA mechism. If it is actually created through a processing
table function as in:


  @keyT   if:
          then: lookup new=test r=free
          if:
          then: copy new;  write new;   end

This new record will have @cd filled, but not @ud.


As for the @ct which Mark quite naturally assumed was there... I have been
asking for this field sicne the first second I realized it wasn't there.
Actually, I have asked, begged, pleaded, yelled, screamed, bitched, moaned
and a zillion of other verbs for it.  To me, it would be the simplest of
things to just use one of the spare/uused bytes in the header and do it...
do it.  DO IT. Sheesh, this would be SO helpful.  I have never... ever...
heard a reason for why it hasn't been done.  Ken, any explanation... I may
have never asked the horse's mouth...   How about it. I, personally, would
take a delay of 3 months in 5.0.14 if @ct, and @ut, and @bt could be added.
Why hasn't this been done in 'lo these many years?

For Mark, unfortunately, for now, fields have to be used for @ct and @ut
(even @bt) if you want them... and they of course have to be manually
maintained.

John