>>Not a stupid question; rather valid one. Here is why. I have a generic routine that calls SQL Server to get some records (basically executing SQLEXEC()). This function has a "generic" WAIT statement. But sometimes I want the routine (function/method) that call this generic function to have a more specific WAIT statement. So my thought was that in the generic function I could "check" to see if a WAIT statement already displayed and not to display another one.
>
>Why can't you do that right inside that function? I mean, the wait command. Instead of issuing the wait where you do now, pass its content to this function and let it handle the cases. That way you have all your related waits (except Tom) in one place.
I see what you are saying. This is a valid approach but the downside is that I would have to add this parameters in million places where the function is being used. I dón't think it is worth all these troubles. If I can't determine that WAIT already exists, one "generic" will be displayed.
Thank you for your suggestion.
"The creative process is nothing but a series of crises." Isaac Bashevis Singer
"My experience is that as soon as people are old enough to know better, they don't know anything at all." Oscar Wilde
"If a nation values anything more than freedom, it will lose its freedom; and the irony of it is that if it is comfort or money that it values more, it will lose that too." W.Somerset Maugham
