@AF Clarification Needed...

[Stanley - stanlyn-com]

>> Can you define "having problems with @AF"?
Yes Ken,

The associated field values is always pointing to the value in the first
associated field, even though @af is higher than 1.  In the top table
definition below where the first Item # is field=90 and af=1, the second
item # is field=98 and af=2, and so on.

When enter data on the screen for the 5th item using this code in the input
proc   

@wlfI2)
If  : I2) eq ".sh" 
Then: G2)="6055-475" ; I2)="SHIPPING" ; D2)="Shipping"

The debugger is reporting I2)=.sh as it should, @af is eq to 5 as it should,
now the problem... D2), Q2), M2) are all showing their values from the 1st
set as if @af=1, and will proceed to overwrite them.

I have never experienced this when the associated fields are contiguous.

Hope this explains it
Stanley






-----Original Message-----
From: Kenneth Brody [mailto:kenbrody at spamcop.net] 
Sent: Monday, October 03, 2011 11:53 AM
To: Stanley - stanlyn-com
Cc: filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
Subject: Re: @AF Clarification Needed...

On 10/3/2011 11:25 AM, Stanley - stanlyn-com wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Does the @AF function and behavior work the same whether the table is
> structured as in table A and table B below?  I am having problems with @AF
> when using it with table A below, and NO problems with table B.  Define
> Proc=5.0.14D4, sco OpenSrv5
>
> Table A (with each associated field in a block where they are NOT next to
> each other)
>
> 90- I2) Item #1
> 91- Q2) Qty #1
> 92- M2) UOM #1
[...]
> 98- I2) Item #2
> 99- Q2) Qty #1
> 100- M2) UOM #2
[...]
>
> Table B (with each associated field next to each other)
>
> 38- D1) PayDate #1
> 39- D1) PayDate #2
> 40- D1) PayDate #3
[...]
> 49- G1) G/L Code #1
> 50- G1) G/L Code #2
> 51- G1) G/L Code #3
[...]
>
> And yes, I know how to normalize.  This is legacy code that needs some
small
> changes to the @AF stuff.

No, it doesn't matter whether the fields are contiguous or not.

Can you define "having problems with @AF"?

-- 
Kenneth Brody