long variable error... a fix needed for 5.5.

[GCC Consulting]

> Subject: Re: long variable error... a fix needed for 5.5.
> 
> 
> > | So, this becomes a decision as to whether to treat long 
> variables as 
> > | the kind that _have_ multiple (up to 10) copies, like 2-character 
> > | variables.  Or treat them as if they were defined on the 
> automatic 
> > | table with only one copy.  The rub is, of course, that 
> they can be 
> > | defined on the automatic table as "global"... not (,g) 
> but "global" 
> > | so how should they work in that instance, and others even 
> more complicated... defined on CALLS, etc.
> 
> I understand that DECLARE GLOBAL means the value will travel 
> between tables - not unlike the variables defined in the 
> automatic table.
> 
> But the (,,g) in the definition indicates the value travels 
> between records.  A way to collect data across records.


Nancy,

I have set declared values using (,,g) and they do work.  Early on there was a
problem of declared values loosing their value at the break.  But I haven't seen
this behavior since 5.0.9.		

I am running a number of -v processing tables which have declared values with
(,g) edits. They hold their values as I use them for selecting records. When
declared global, I can set dummy fields to print out these values on the report
if necessary.

Have you tried this recently?

Richard Kreiss
GCC Consulting