browse lookup phenomenon

[Dennis Malen]

Richard,

I hope 5.0 fixes it. I just want to confirm that when you tried the chained 
browse lookup you were able to scroll up so that the first record on the 
bottom part of the screen no longer shows and then you were able to scroll 
back down and see the first record again.

In my case input works and chain and call does not. I am not able to scroll 
down to view the first record that was there. After further investigation 
that seems to be the case with all my call and chain browse lookups. Input 
always works correctly.

Thanks for your help, it is most appreciated.

Dennis

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "GCC Consulting" <gccconsulting at comcast.net>
To: "'Dennis Malen'" <dmalen at malen.com>; "'Kenneth Brody'" 
<kenbrody at bestweb.net>
Cc: <filepro-list at lists.celestial.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 11:08 AM
Subject: RE: browse lookup phenomenon


> Dennis,
>
> I tested this problem as both a called table and a chained process.  Both
> time it worked perfectly.
>
> As I mentioned to you last night, This problem my resolve itself when you
> install 5.0 on your AIX system.
>
> Richard
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: filepro-list-bounces at lists.celestial.com
>> [mailto:filepro-list-bounces at lists.celestial.com] On Behalf
>> Of Dennis Malen
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 6:47 PM
>> To: Kenneth Brody
>> Cc: filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
>> Subject: Re: browse lookup phenomenon
>>
>> Ken,
>>
>> I tried the -z and created a call processing. They both did
>> not work properly. The only thing that worked as it should
>> was "input" (@key).
>>
>> Dennis
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Kenneth Brody" <kenbrody at bestweb.net>
>> To: "Dennis Malen" <dmalen at malen.com>
>> Cc: <filepro-list at lists.celestial.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 4:59 PM
>> Subject: Re: browse lookup phenomenon
>>
>>
>> > Quoting Dennis Malen (Wed, 22 Mar 2006 16:38:00 -0500):
>> >
>> >> Ken,
>> >>
>> >> Do you mean a -z for an alternate input processing table
>> or a -y for an
>> >> alternate auto processing table?
>> >
>> > Sorry, I meant "-z" to replace the input.
>> >
>> > [...]
>> >> > Well, given that the prc that you chain to becomes the
>> input prc, I
>> >> > don't see how it would make any difference.  If you run
>> that same prc
>> >> > with "-y", does it work?
>> > [...]
>> >
>> > --
>> > KenBrody at BestWeb dot net        spamtrap:
>> <g8ymh8uf001 at sneakemail.com>
>> > http://www.hvcomputer.com
>> > http://www.fileProPlus.com
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Filepro-list mailing list
>> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
>> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
>>
>
>
>
>
>