Could this be a bug in FilePro? (Was--Weird output with associated field)

[GCC Consulting]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: filepro-list-
> bounces+gccconsulting=comcast.net at lists.celestial.com [mailto:filepro-
> list-bounces+gccconsulting=comcast.net at lists.celestial.com] On Behalf
> Of GCC Consulting
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 12:02 PM
> To: 'Boaz Bezborodko'; filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> Subject: RE: Could this be a bug in FilePro? (Was--Weird output with
> associated field)
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: filepro-list-
> > bounces+gccconsulting=comcast.net at lists.celestial.com
> [mailto:filepro-
> > list-bounces+gccconsulting=comcast.net at lists.celestial.com] On Behalf
> > Of Boaz Bezborodko
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 11:50 AM
> > To: filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > Subject: Re: Could this be a bug in FilePro? (Was--Weird output with
> > associated field)
> >
> > >
> > > when I look at the code, I am also making some assumptions, but
> they
> > > should be confirmed:
> > >
> > > first, note as Ken White's suggested code shows, make sure to use
> > > -nl for the lookup that tests if you've gone beyond your range
> > > of records of interest.
> > >
> > I replaced the flag with the -nl and have the same problem, but I
> > expected this since the problem is occurring at the beginning of the
> > file.
> >
> > > Are ba and bb global (or have their expected values every time they
> > > get to where they are tested as part of the conditional lookups)?
> >
> > They are global and are listed in AUTO processing.
> >
> > > On both command line and in the lookups you are using letter o and
> > not
> > > zero, right?
> >
> > Right.
> >
> > > You say index "o" is built on date field "20".  Is that also the
> same
> > > edit and does the index go across ten bytes of that date field?
> > It is the same edit, though they are all (8,mdy/). In my field it is
> > 'ai' that is incorrectly set to 10 bytes. But this shouldn't cause
> the
> > problem as it is at the end of the processing. Even with fixing this
> > the
> > error occurs. In stepping through with debug I've confirmed that the
> > first record chosen by the "LOOKUP -" is the record with which I have
> > the problem.
> >
> > > After checking all this, are you getting the expected # of
> > > records selected?
> > No. Whenever I use this method I'm always off by the number of
> > populated
> > associated fields after the first one. So FilePro does a "SELECT" on
> > the
> > record as it should, but it is only adding the first associated
> field,
> > and not any subsequent ones, *in the first indexed record only*. If
> the
> > same record was to appear anywhere but first in the indexed order
> then
> > all the associated fields are added as records. And if a different
> > record with multiple associated fields populated is first in the
> > selection order then it will also have only the first associated
> field
> > selected as records for the output.
> >
> > > If you think selecting the right records, but still are not getting
> > > the expected output, then post the output processing as well.
> > >
> > 1 ------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > ◄ If: ◄
> > Then: lookup glap k=A1 i=a -nx ◄
> > 2 ------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > ◄ If: not glap ◄
> > Then: beep;show "@ACCOUNT NUMBER NOT FOUND"&1 ◄
> > 3 ------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > ◄ If: ◄
> > Then: ab(36,*)=glap(2) ; ac(8,*)=glap(7) ; ad(48,*)=27 ; ◄
> > 4 ------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > ◄ If: 32="PAYROLL" ◄
> > Then: ae(1,*)="P" ◄
> > 5 ------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > ◄ If: ◄
> > Then: END ◄
> > 6 ------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> >
> > Since there is no PRINT statement then all records that are selected
> > should appear on the report. But the error is occurring before this
> > part
> > of the process. If I used the indexing method then I get fewer
> records
> > selected then if I go through the whole file.
> >
> > Boaz
> > _______________________________________________
> > Filepro-list mailing list
> > Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> > http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> 
> Have you tried a selection set using  20 eqf @td and -j on the command
> line?
> 
> This should select your records rapidly and avoid your -v selection
> processing but give you the selection speed you're looking for.  Or at
> least
> See if all of your records are being selected.
> 
> 
> Richard Kreiss
> GCC Consulting
> rkreiss at gccconsulting.net

Change that to A1 eqf @td

Richard