Associated fields

[Kenneth Brody]

Quoting GCC (Fri, 9 Sep 2005 08:50:44 -0400):

[... Changed "phone_xxx" fields to "p1) phone_xxx" associated group ...]

> So, this begs the question, if *clerk can run the program properly using
> phone_xxxx, why does the syntax check show an error?  Yes I realize that
> 20 p1) phone_home is not 20 phone_hone.

dclerk/dreport won't see "phone_home", either, if it's "p1) phone_home".

My guess is you're using rclerk/rreport, correct?

In that case, you were using a tok file which was compiled when there
was a field 20 called "phone_home", and so is still referring to field
20.

--
KenBrody at BestWeb dot net        spamtrap: <g8ymh8uf001 at sneakemail.com>
http://www.hvcomputer.com
http://www.fileProPlus.com