Answering filePro questions (was Re: how many users?)

[Kenneth Brody]

On 12/7/2013 8:58 PM, Fairlight wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 12:09:40PM -0500, Kenneth Brody thus spoke:
>> On 12/5/2013 9:23 PM, Fairlight wrote:
>>> On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 11:29:54AM -0500, Kenneth Brody thus spoke:
>>>>
>>>> But, if dclerk system's out to dreport, you'll see two entries.
>>>> (Actually, you'll probably see 3, including the original runmenu.)
>>>
>>> Yes, and if you're running <= 5.6, my approach is still correct, since
>>> system()ing off clerk and report ate another licence prior to that version.
>>> Most of my clients are still on <= 5.0.14.
>>
>> Given that 5.0.14 was released over 9 years ago, I didn't really
>> feel the need to include that as part of the discussion.  ;-)
>
> Then, respectfully as possible, you're out of touch with a sizeable chunk
> of the userbase's desires, state, and direction.  I know far more people,
> clients and non-clients both, who use <= 5.0.14 than not.  Most of the

Perhaps.  However, if someone asks me how to do something in filePro, I will 
base my answer on the current version, unless they specify otherwise.

If someone asks "how do I get LISTBOX() to start with the highlight at a 
given position", my answer would be "pass it as the 8th parameter", not "use 
PUSHKEY to push the desired amount of CDWNs".

If someone asks "how do I get the page number to start back at 1 in the 
middle of a report", I would answer "use RESET @PN", and not some 
long-winded description of keeping track of the page number manually.

If someone were to ask "how can I intercept @KEYF and conditionally list the 
forms to print", I would mention "DOKEY".

Etc., etc., etc.

[...]
> Windows XP was released longer ago than that, and it's still not EOL for
> another four months.  RHEL and SLE[SD] distributions have a shelf life of
> ten years.  I scoff at your arbitrary nine year line in the sand for many
> reasons.

I didn't draw any "line in the sand".  I didn't say "I won't answer your 
question because you're not on the current version", did I?

filePro still supports Windows XP.  And we purposely use an older version of 
Linux for building filePro, just so that we can still support the 
11-year-old 2.3 version of glibc still used by some distribs.

>> ps -e -o sess,pid,comm | grep [flags] | awk '{print $1}' | sort -n | wc -l
>
> Bleh.  If I have to invoke sort(1), I'm going to use perl so that I'm
> -sure- it's done right. sort(1) tends to do what it likes, rather than
> what it intuitively should.

Well, I don't recall ever having a problem with sort, and certainly not with 
"sort -n" when the first column is a number.  (However, I've never used it 
for any "complex" sorting.)

YMMV.

> Even perl's sort() has this tendency, but the
> saving grace is that you can actually specify a definable callback and
> program the -exact- relationships you want, if the stock behaviour isn't
> cutting it.

-- 
Kenneth Brody