Multiple TOT()s, one field (was RE: TOT(0 seems broke)

[Bruce Easton]

George Simon wrote Wednesday, March 07, 2007 1:17 PM:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: filepro-list-bounces+george=worldest.com at lists.celestial.com
> [mailto:filepro-list-bounces+george=worldest.com at lists.celestial.com] On
> Behalf Of Kenneth Brody
> Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 12:28 PM
> To: Bruce Easton
> Cc: filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> Subject: Multiple TOT()s, one field (was RE: TOT(0 seems broke)
> 
> Quoting Bruce Easton (Wed, 7 Mar 2007 12:09:16 -0500):
> 
> > Kenneth Brody wrote Wednesday, March 07, 2007 10:40 AM:
> > > > Also, here's something you can do with TOT() that will delight and
> > > > confuse everyone here.   :-)
> > > >
> > > >       If:  foobar eq "Y"
> > > >     Then:  xx = tot(foo)
> > > >       If:  foobar ne "Y"
> > > >     Then:  xx = tot(bar)
> > > >
> > > > What would you expect "xx" to hold?  I'll tell you right away that
> > > > it is _not_ the same as
> > > >
> > > >       If:  foobar eq "Y"
> > > >     Then:  xx = xx + foo
> > > >       If:  foobar ne "Y"
> > > >     Then:  xx = xx + bar
> [...]
> > I would expect xx in the first example to hold only the total of foo
> > at that point, if the last occurrence of foobar was "Y", otherwise it
> > would only be the total of bar at that point.
> >
> > In the second, I would expect xx to be the total of all of occurrences
> > that foo and bar held at that point.
> 
> Correct to you and Chad.
> 
> There are two distinct totals being calculated in example 1.  There
> are the totals for foo when foobar is "Y", and the totals for bar
> when foobar is not "Y", and they are kept track of separately,
> despite both having the current total stored into xx.
> 
> In other words, xx contains either tot(foo) or tot(bar), depending
> on the current value of foobar.
> 
> --
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Filepro-list mailing list
> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> 
> So how is that different from 
>        If:  foobar eq "Y"
>      Then:  xx = xx + foo
>        If:  foobar ne "Y"
>      Then:  xx = xx + bar
> 
> xx would end up with the same total.  No?
> 
> say foo=5 and bar=6
> 
> rec# 1	foobar="Y"	--	x=0+5	--	x=5
> rec# 2	foobar="N"	--	x=5+6	--	x=11
> rec# 3	foobar="N"	--	x=11+6	x=17
> rec# 4	foobar="Y"	--	x=17+5	x=22
> rec# 5	foobar="Y"	--	x=22+5	x=27
> 
> What am I missing?
> 

George, using your example above which ends on 'foobar="Y",' 
but with Ken's code using the tot function:

> > > >       If:  foobar eq "Y"
> > > >     Then:  xx = tot(foo)
> > > >       If:  foobar ne "Y"
> > > >     Then:  xx = tot(bar),

I think xx would wind up with only 15 (the total of all the 
foo values encountered), since your last record has 
'foobar="Y".' (Assuming that your output process processed 
your rec# 5 last.)

Bruce 

Bruce Easton
STN, Inc.