Are there edit limits on DECLARE GLOBAL?

[Richard Kreiss]

John,

If Boaz is using the declared values to hold totals, he could do what I
usually do, use an array(s) to hold the values needed.  I hate using
xx=total(N), it never seems to work right for me.  Ken has explained the
proper use of this a number of times but I still prefer to use an array,
even a 1 element array.

This also has the advantage of allowing the clearing of all elements with a
single clear zzz command.

Richard


> -----Original Message-----
> From: filepro-list-bounces+rkreiss=verizon.net at lists.celestial.com
[mailto:filepro-list-
> bounces+rkreiss=verizon.net at lists.celestial.com] On Behalf Of John Esak
> Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 3:57 PM
> To: filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> Subject: RE: Are there edit limits on DECLARE GLOBAL?
> 
> I just tried to duplicate the 200,,g  doesn't work and 100,,g does work
for
> declared global variables... and I can't break it.  I did it with the
> declare global    @menu and then mesgbox'd the edit and len of the vars
> during a CALL from an @key.  All works.  Then I saw you said in report it
> doesn't work.... what doesn't work... keeping the value record to record?
> Or passing the len and edit to a call ?  Or forget all that... just show
> some code that doesn't work on your box and I'll try it on mine.  But if
you
> have the latest version I don't think there is much that doesn't work in
the
> declare area.
> 
> There is the one big gotcha about declares and the 10 copies of variables
> .... that is different for declared variables than 2 character
> variables..... that may possibly appear as if values aren't being kept
> record to record if you're testing at the subtotal or total level.   Is
that
> what you are doing?
> 
> John
> 
> 
>   _____
> 
> From: Boaz Bezborodko [mailto:boaz at mirrotek.com]
> Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 12:29 PM
> To: john at valar.com
> Cc: filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> Subject: Re: Are there edit limits on DECLARE GLOBAL?
> 
> 
> I did try using a (200,*,g) and that didn't work in my processing, but
> (100,*,g) did work.
> 
> Processing table 1:
> ::Declare Xvalue(200,*,g)
> ::Xvalue=<~25 character string>
> 
> Precessing table 2:
> ::Declare Yvalue
> ::aa(10,*)=GETENV("USERNAME")
> ::ab(7,.0)=<some number>
> ::Yvalue=aa{Xvalue{ab
> 
> If Xvalue is set to a length of 200 then Yvalue will equal 'aa{Xvalue and
ab
> isn't part of it.
> If Xvalue is set to a length of 100 then Yvalue will equal the complete
> 'aa{Xvalue{ab
> 
> I did not change the  program to set a limit for Yvalue simply because 100
> should be good enough for my application and it worked.  But I am curious
as
> to what may be the limiting factor.
> 
> John Esak wrote:
> 
> I think I see what you're getting at... But why?  Why do you want them
> 
> uncast?  Yes, you have to give them a length just to be able to get the ,g
> 
> attached as well.  Couldn't you just assign them a very huge value, say
> 
> 32,767 (the max length) and put the ,g.  A hundred of these wouldn't even
be
> 
> 5 meg of memory?  Aren't we all dealing with 2Gb of memory these days?
> 
> 
> 
> John
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> 
> From: filepro-list-bounces+john=valar.com at lists.celestial.com
> 
> [mailto:filepro-list-bounces+john=valar.com at lists.celestial.co
> 
> 
> 
> m] On Behalf Of Boaz Bezborodko
> 
> 
> 
> Sent: Friday, April 23, 2010 4:04 PM
> 
> To: Kenneth Brody
> 
> Cc: filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> 
> Subject: Re: Are there edit limits on DECLARE GLOBAL?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kenneth Brody wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 4/23/2010 3:26 PM, Boaz Bezborodko wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> I am using DECLARE GLOBAL in some of my processing to pass
> 
> 
> 
> variables
> 
> 
> 
> between tables.  Is there a requirement for an edit on
> 
> 
> 
> these variables?
> 
> 
> 
> IOW, can I leave the edit off and have a virtually unlimited length
> 
> variable passed between tables?
> 
> 
> 
> ObReply:  "What happened when you tried it?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It works on my input processing table, but fails when used in
> 
> a report
> 
> processing table.  Without the ',g' in an edit it doesn't keep the
> 
> information from one record to the next.  Is there a way around this?
> 
> 
> 
> Boaz
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> Filepro-list mailing list
> 
> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> 
> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: http://mailman.celestial.com/pipermail/filepro-
> list/attachments/20100425/4ea3567d/attachment.html
> _______________________________________________
> Filepro-list mailing list
> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list