Hi Koen.
No hard feelings at all and many thanks for yout contributions.
Doctors differ and patients die ... Programmers differ and ......(fill in the blanks)

Regards,
Gerard


>Hi,
>
>I dont want to be nasty, nor picky, just wanted to make something clear. So without any hard feelings, I hope.
>
>you misunderstand me.
>Rule # 1 is there should be an ID and an Index
>your particular application is lacking of that. I would advise you to correct that first and from there on you can go-on.
>
>And your - the client will not pay for a full re-development - I agree, but I also have the opinion that clients should not pay for correction of mistakes and I call a table without ID and without an Index a clear mistake.
>
>However it seems you are satisfied with the found solution, so be it, I just wanted to make it clear to you that the solution you found is not to be progagandaded as being a nice generic one.
>
>Best regards,
>
>Koen
>++
>
>>Hi Koen.
>>In this partcular case I would disagree with you.
>>I am providing some additional functionality to an app that has already been designed.
>>IN this partcular App, the Record Number is irrelevant. In a partcular form, I select records into a Temporary Table, and I want to insert a row
>> in the middle, and then write them back out again with the inserted row in the middle. Unfortunately, the individual Rows do not have a 'Sequence number' so other than rewriting the complete app, I think that using INSERT BLANK BEFORE (Just on a temporary file) is a reasonable solution, in that Financial Considerations are important (i.e. the client will not pay for a full re-development)
>>
>>Regards,
>>Gerard
>>
>>
>>>Hi Gerard,
>>>
>>>Sorry but you are not correct: your application does not apply to rule #1 ( use index tags) and this rule is imperative!
>>>The Exception you claim to find is incorrect. Never ever apply a table without an ID and an index.
>>>I even believe it was a mistake of David not to make this default when he designed FP.
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>
>>>Koen
>>>++
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hi Tore.
>>>>Generally I would agree with you, but I think there will ALWAYS be an exception . Indeeed, is'nt it the Exception always proves the rule !!
>>>>In this partcular case, its an existing app with 1000's of lines of code, the Table thats being inserted against will never be more than 20/30 records and the customer requires an Insert option.
>>>>The options are:
>>>>1. Redesign completetrly the exisitng APP , intoduce indexes where thre were none , with a big chance of breaking it, and also investing perhaps 3 or 4 days in redeveloping and testing
>>>>
>>>>2. Introsuce about 5 lines of Code (INSERT BLANK BEFORE) being one of them, and as far as I can see this will do the job.
>>>>
>>>>I am inclined to go for Option 2.
>>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>Gerard
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Rule # 1: Never make an application where the record number is important, use index tags instead.
>>>>>Rule # 2: If the record number is important, rethink your design and see rule # 1.
>>>>>Rule # 3: There are NO exceptions to these rules.
>>>>>
>>>>>>ok Sorted this.
>>>>>>It appears that if the table has any index file associated (even though you have not Set Order to) , it always appends the row
>>>>>>If all Indexes are removed from the table, it works fine
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Hi.
>>>>>>>I have a small basic DBF with a few fields and I want to insert a row
>>>>>>>I position myself on the 3rd row OF 10
>>>>>>>No indexes are on
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>INSERT BLANK BEFORE
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>but it appends a row at the end (i.e. 11th record instead of being the 2nd record)
>>>>>>>I know I have done this in the past , but cant get it to work today.
>>>>>>>What am I missing ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Tia
>>>>>>>Gerard