@ud and @ub updated

[Dennis Malen]

Bruce,

When we deactivated that line the system worked properly without updating 
@ub and @ud. I then activated the line again and instead using field number 
63 I used a dummy field "zq" and placed it in the appropriate screens. That 
also solved the processing problem by not updating @ud and @ub.

Can we conclude for everyone's benefit that in auto processing it is not a 
good idea to write to a real field but it is OK to write to a dummy 
field?????



Dennis Malen
516.479.5912
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bruce Easton" <bruce at stn.com>
To: <filepro-list at lists.celestial.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 4:06 PM
Subject: RE: @ud and @ub updated


> Kenneth Brody wrote Wednesday, April 11, 2007 3:53 PM:
>> Quoting Dennis Malen (Wed, 11 Apr 2007 15:38:57 -0400):
>>
>> > Ken and Bruce,
>> >
>> > I have attached the entire auto prc. I have sent this to only Ken &
>> > Bruce as it is the entire auto processing.
>>
>> Look closely at line 9:
>>
>>       If: @sn="7" or @sn="6" or @sn="9" and @cd ne "" 'provide ...
>>     Then: 63=""{"60"-(@td-5) '<"LEFT"
>>
>> [...]
>>
>
> Yes that was the main thing that stuck out like a sore thumb to me.
> Also, I wonder about what goes on in called table "msxyy."  Also,
> lines 81-82:  'pushkey "[SAVE]".'  And I'm not sure about if the
> "closes" to lookup files that are done in there would make any
> difference.  There is a lot of stuff in there screen statements and
> switchto's.  But yeah, the "63=" is a killer, but Dennis, you'll
> have to try the debugger on lower lines to make sure since many
> of these lines are conditional.
>
> Bruce
>
> Bruce Easton
> STN, Inc.
> _______________________________________________
> Filepro-list mailing list
> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
>
>
>