Unix import of a DOS spreadsheet...

[John Esak]

> -----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 Mike Schwartz
> Sent: Saturday, September 04, 2010 4:31 PM
> To: filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> Subject: RE: Unix import of a DOS spreadsheet...
> 
>      Thanks, John.  I've written hundreds of imports and 
> exports, so I know
> about dtox, xlate and most of the other methods mentioned for 
> working around
> the problem.  It was just that I came across the r=10&13 
> syntax in Stuart
> Werner's filePro Developer's Reference and I was trying to 
> get that to work.

So the book actually showed something that doesn't work at all?  Why would
it do that? I know that the r= is limited only to very specific character
representations and chr("10") or chr("13) or even r=10 or r=13 (as you
showed them) are not allowed. So why do you suppose the book shows them as
usable?  Doesn't make sense to me.  I wonder if he just didn't chek the
idea, but just put it in as an example to follow without even trying it
himself? I hope I'm not being overly picky, but it doesn't say much for the
book's preparation.  I think I would only use Laura's Help Files as the most
authoritative "reference" for filePro.  I know Stuart calls his book that (a
Reference), but it always bothered me. I only have the very first edition.
George gave it to me when I went out to talk with him just after Personix
bought the company. I remember saying, "George, I don't want to take
this..." and he laughed and said, "Take it! When would I ever have time to
read this?"  Funny, both myself and Robert Preville (who went with me to
their new offices). Funny, because he gets a "book" all about his product,
and he couldn't or wouldn't even find the time to read it. It actually
didn't make us think funny, it made us think sad.  The book binding wasn't
een cracked. I don't think he did more than riffle through the pages once
and put it aside.  Then, he gave it to me.  I had already seen most of the
stuff in there, because a lot of the ideas and examples came from The Guru
Magazine and The filePro CookBooks, but I, at least took the time to
carefully examine the work. I think it has been updated several times since
that first publishin batch, but I haven't seen it since. I doubt he would
remove the reference to 10 and 13 in the IMPORT example now, because I think
Stuart is pretty much well retired for many years now. But maybe if there
are a whole lot of things they have found since the last printing, they
could release an errata sheet, or sheets.

I have a little more leeway with the Survivor Series CD's. I can change or
edit a movie pretty easily. I can modify, add or delete references from the
index. Usually, I only add to the index when I think of some new way or word
to refer to a function. So the next set of CD's I make is always the most
updated. In this regard, on-line sources have a great benefit over books.
And the ability for hypertext links to bounce you quickly to related topics
is great.  But, I'm still and old person in my feelings about books. I just
like the linear all visible at one time way a book is in your hands. Even
though it's longer and harder and no links, popups, sounds, movies, etc., I
still love books above anything else.  Except, since I've been reading them
from my 5th birthday, my most favorite  media in the world is a talking
book. Anything well read by a talented reader is simply the best thing
going. I can listen to a book while relaxing, or while doing something else
like cleaning, building and so forth. 

</aside>
For example, I'm listening to the Shadow Factory right now as I write this
message. By the way, it's just a fact by fact rundown of the NSA's rundown
of the 911 terrorist act from its conception to comclusion, and it is
inetesting as hell. I've learned a lot from it that I didn't know, and even
with no fictional plot, or protagonist, etc., it is a very good listen. I do
NOT know if it would be a good read. It might be a little too detailed,
bordering on a little boring... But since I will never actually "read" it, I
have to just say, it's a great listen.)
<aside/>

And, by the way, Mike... I wasn't writing the hints and stuff about IMPORT
specifically to you or anyone... I actually didn't notice who was on the
thread other than Ken after you started it.  I just write material for
general consumption. I figure whoever is reading the thread has some kind of
interest in it, not just the originator.  I know you know your stuff about
filePro. :-)

John Esak