qualifier limit

[Brian K. White]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <ryan at bulldogsoftware.com>
To: "Jay R. Ashworth" <jra at baylink.com>
Cc: <filepro-list at lists.celestial.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 2:14 PM
Subject: Re: qualifier limit


> On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 02:00:01PM -0400, Jay R. Ashworth said:
>
>> > > <contrarian>
>> > >
>> > > consider that a speed bump to remind you to evaluate the design 
>> > > that's
>> > > causing you to need 160+ qualifiers.  :-)
>> > >
>> > > </contrarian>
>> >
>> > Well you don't have to shoot me down. I'm just the messenger.
>>
>> Show of hands:
>>
>> Did *ANYONE ON THE LIST* think I was shooting at Ryan, in my message,
>> entirely quoted above?   :-)
>
> Okay, well since you included a smiley I won't press charges. :-)
>
> Perhaps you meant 'us' and not 'you'.

I thought he meant in equal parts, you as in really you Ryan, and the 
nonspecific you as in "one" as in "One must not take emails too seriously" .

And I have a clarification or correction to my description of the processing 
flow I said I observed. One key item I left out that makes sense now, given 
what Ken said,
The next line executed after the @wlf was the line after the call statement 
in the parent table, but, what I forgot to mention was that the @wlf was not 
executed as a result of leaving the field, it was executed as a result of 
hittig esc-esc.

So it's not @wlf that is important, it's exiting the screen. (probably del 
would have done the same as esc-esc).

Brian K. White  --  brian at aljex.com  --  http://www.aljex.com/bkw/
+++++[>+++[>+++++>+++++++<<-]<-]>>+.>.+++++.+++++++.-.[>+<---]>++.
filePro BBx  Linux SCO  Prosper/FACTS AutoCAD  #callahans Satriani