Mike

again I am fully with you. It indeed strikes me that so often people stumble over a mal formatted application and therefor not being able to do the most normal things, they instead of correcting the basic error, fight with themselves and hurt the brains to find a palliative solution. .
This case is a beautiful example for that.
What is now so difficult to alter a structure (add an ID) and make an index?
By the way when you add this field I would also add straight away an integer field Sequence. So users can sequence to their needs.

Regards,

Koen



>>Hi Koen.
>>No hard feelings at all and many thanks for yout contributions.
>>Doctors differ and patients die ...
>
>so they make and enforce standards to prevent that :)
>
>Programmers differ and ......(fill in the blanks)
>
>time and money are wasted and they go about patting themselves on the back for being dumb er clever enough to recreate the wheel, again. :)
>
>
>>
>>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