5.0.13 vs 5.0.14 declared values
GCC Consulting
gcc at optonline.net
Sun Nov 7 17:59:06 PST 2004
> -----Original Message-----
> From: filepro-list-bounces at lists.celestial.com
> [mailto:filepro-list-bounces at lists.celestial.com] On Behalf
> Of Scott Nelson
> Sent: Sunday, November 07, 2004 7:30 PM
> To: Kenneth Brody; FilePro Mailing List
> Subject: Re: 5.0.13 vs 5.0.14 declared values
>
> Kenneth Brody wrote:
>
> >GCC Consulting wrote:
> >[...]
> >
> >
> > at I found was that I needed to, in auto processing, declare
> >
> >>last_line(3,.0,g). When I did this, everything worked perfectly.
> >>
> >>Has anyone else found that a routine using declared values stopped
> >>working correctly with version 5.0.14.
> >>
> >>
> >[...]
> >
> >It didn't "work perfectly" in 5.0.13. Your code was broken (it was
> >missing the ",g" needed to retain values between records),
> but "worked"
> >due to a bug in 5.0.13 which didn't properly clear the
> values between
> >records. When you moved to 5.0.14, your bug was no longer hidden.
> >
> >
> >
>
> Are you saying dummy field values were kept between records,
> even if not global? Or did this just affect declare variables?
>
> When this kind of bug is found, fptech should have a way of
> notifying developers. This could have caused all kinds of
> pesky problems.
>
I think Ken was saying that Declared values did not clear between records.
Which is the behavior I was seeing between my office system system running
5.0.13 and my laptop running 5.0.14.
Granted, fpTech should have notify us of this bug so that we could take steps to
avoid a programming error which is going to be corrected in a maintenance
release causing us to have to go back and correct any working programs which
used this bug.
Richard Kreiss
GCC Consulting
More information about the Filepro-list
mailing list