Open selection set exclusions

[Bruce Easton]

(inline response)
Don Coleman wrote Thursday, March 13, 2008 11:56 AM:
> Can anyone tell me how to exclude similar codes in an open selection set?

I don't think there is any way other than using explicit tests like
you have below, Don.  And I doubt that you would want the client
to have to load and adjust selection sets for each specific run.
As Richard suggested - selection processing would handle this
situation.

A selection set as an extremely powerful tool, in regard to
its capability for expressing fairly complex logic grouping in
what screen space there is to work with, and I view your problem
(knowing how filepro compares fields by default) more as
how (what I'm assuming is) a key field is designed for use, not in the
capability of the selection set.  Do you have any control over
the values of the customer # field?  Sounds like that customer
field is supposed to be a unique key field. If so, then knowing
how filepro compares values, I would suggest, for example,
forcing the key field to not only be unique, but having
all bytes of the field populated.  (I suggest this, because,
if you are trying to stay away from processing, and there currently
is not much processing running with this that dissects that field,
then you might be able to easily apply this with an edit of some
kind on that key field to pad it with non-blanks, then run a
one-time to change the  field on all files where it occurs.)
Of course it's easy for me to say - when someone suggests I
consider redesign the size or usage of a key field - I tend
to run away. :)

Bruce

Bruce Easton
STN, Inc.


>
> Example:
> If I am running a report for customer # PAC but a customer # PACH also
> exists both will be included on the report & totals.  Is there a
> way to only
> select the exact customer #'s outlined in the open selection?  I know this
> can be done in processing but I am hoping there is a way for the client to
> do within the open selection.
>
> Note this report is being run for 24 customers so it is not as easy as
> specifying
> 9 eq PAC
> 9 ne PACH
>
> Although this could be done by linking several selection sets
> together such
> as:
>
> 9 eq PAC
> 9 lt PACA
> 9 eq PAG
> 9 lt PAGA
> Etc...
>
> I know the wildcard characters can be used to include (such as
> PAC=), don't
> know if the opposite of a wildcard (discard) exists.
>
> TY,
>
> Don Coleman
> Donald G. Coleman, Consultant
> 402 Andrew Circle
> Indiana, PA 15701
> dcoleman at dgcreact.com
> (724) 349-6302
>
> _______________________________________________
> Filepro-list mailing list
> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
>