Level Extreme platform
Subscription
Corporate profile
Products & Services
Support
Legal
Français
Index and transaction
Message
From
16/07/1998 17:13:40
 
 
To
16/07/1998 16:47:49
Dragan Nedeljkovich (Online)
Now officially retired
Zrenjanin, Serbia
General information
Forum:
Visual FoxPro
Category:
Coding, syntax & commands
Miscellaneous
Thread ID:
00116702
Message ID:
00118370
Views:
28
I'm sorry. What I see is a a really poorly designed way of entering and viewing data (IMHO). Do you disagree that he is entering data in one session and looking at it in another? Depending on how often the data is refreshed, I wouldn't expect it to be all in synch.

Your supposition is different than Aleks' example. He opened table in the prg, then added and viewed tables from two distinct data sessions. Depending on how often the data refreshes, I wouldn't expect them to be always (or reliably) synched. If two forms need to share a datasession, then they should. If they don't, well, then the developer has to handle (in one way or another) how the data gets refreshed. Don't they?

Maybe I'm missing something important (I don't even get why the Readonly seems to be key in Aleks mind) because I'd be suspicious of this design. Period. I really don't blame VFP for getting confused when I've asked it to do something that's inherently...a bad design.

The more I read your response, the more I'm left with the feeling that I'm intrepreting this whole subject very differently than you guys. Don't mean to be confusing.

>I've tried it, too, and - hey, why wouldn't it work? Suppose all the tables are open at app instantiation, i.e. default datasession, which is a common practice, even recommended somewhere (though I don't do that at all). Then user instantiates a readonly form to look around the data. Then user sees that some data are not entered yet, runs another form to fill the missing data in. Why wouldn't these data be reflected in the first form already? Aleks actually depicted a very possible situation, where Fox misbehaves.
>
>Though, this situation I've described (with table open in default datasession) is where this works OK - I've changed
>
>nn=recc() && remember amount of records
>USE
>new_rec='999'
>
>into
>
>nn=recc() && remember amount of records
>USE a shared
>new_rec='999'
>
>And now it works; it's in the more common situation (one form read-only, another issues a transactioned adding of a record) where it blows.
Previous
Next
Reply
Map
View

Click here to load this message in the networking platform