@ud and @ub updated

[Bruce Easton]

Dennis Malen wrote Wednesday, April 11, 2007 4:42 PM:

> 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?????
>

Yes, you can conclude that.  You are allowed to do it of course
in auto prc, but you also should understand what results to
expect when you do.  I do not write real fields in auto and if
I am supporting someone who has it, I make them sign off on my time
to undo it/or my time to test the application thoroughly so that
I see it makes sense.

Also, I would look into that 'pushkey "[SAVE]"' that you have going
on in auto prc - sounds like something that is overly-complicated
and may not work the way you want in all cases kind of thing.

Bruce

Bruce Easton
STN, Inc.