Long variable prob with break processing still

[Shane Gray]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Esak [mailto:john at valar.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, 6 April 2005 3:44
> To: Shane Gray
> Cc: Fplist (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: Long variable prob with break processing still
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: filepro-list-bounces+john=valar.com at lists.celestial.com
> > [mailto:filepro-list-bounces+john=valar.com at lists.celestial.com]On
> > Behalf Of Shane Gray
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 11:38 PM
> > To: Fplist (E-mail)
> > Subject: RE: Long variable prob with break processing still
> >
> >
> >
> > John,
> >
> > I believe quite the contrary is true.  Did you try the sample
> > code?  The long variable does indeed
> > carry through to break totals and this was fixed in v5.0.6 report
> > if I recall correctly.  The
> > problem is that merely assigning the dummy var to be the long
> > variable value causes the dummy
> > variable to _not_ carry its value to break processing when it should.
> >
> > Shane.
>
>
> Shane,
>
> Nope, sorry you are wrong.  But, the appearance is as you say it is, and I
> can see why it is confusing you. As I said, we discussed this quite
> thoroughly fairly recently here and in the FP Room. Ken was clear about how
> and why it works the way it does. However, you can think of it in any way
> that make sense to you. Although, my suggestion would be that you try and
> understand the actual reason for why what you are doing is failing. That
> will make it easier for you to work around the problem. I will explain it
> again. Declared variables do NOT carry the 10 copies of themselves that 2
> character variables do. This is what is causing your problem. I do not need
> to try the "sample" code. It is obvious from looking at it.
>
> I think you are recalling incorrectly... I have no idea what "fix" you are
> talking about in 5.6 or in any version.  With regard to declared variables,
> they have behaved this way since they were put into the program. There is no
> need for you to report anything to support. Everyone is quite aware of this
> behavior.
>
> John
>

Thanks for your explanation John.  I guess I missed that thread entirely as I always try to keep
messages from the list which are pertinent and could not find anything in my archived messages.  I
found the messages to which you refer in the list archives from Oct last year and yes it was all
explained very clearly.

The only thing missing is for fP Tech to explain and document it very clearly that filePro is
"designed" in this way so more time is not wasted by developers on issues such as these.  Or fix it
of course!

Thanks again
Shane.