>>>Hi Karen
>>>
>>>First things first - design. The point of databases is not to do things Row By Agonizing Row, but to think in terms of sets. It is very rare to write a replace command to affect one record. If you are doing that, to me, it suggests this is happening inside a larger loop. 1 replace commands such as this
>>
>>Design?
>>If one like to change multiple records there is SQL UPDATE. Why learning outdated syntax? Is there realy a sense in NEXT xx or WHILE xx? The data should not depend on order .... (Except you are dealing with VFP sources like vcx,scx frx ....)
>>
>>The good on REPLACE is that it can be used on a single record without any change of record pointer and superfluous expression. Here it has a great advantage to SQL UPDATE. So I would do what the OP seems to do (altering a field on a condition) on some pre-save checks on record level using REPLACE.
>
>REPLACE has another benefit
>
>REPLACE ;
>field1 with value1, ;
>field2 with value2
>
>is better than
>
>UPDATE (field1, field2) values (value1, value2)
>
>With long commands, having each field near the update value is a benefit.

You're confused with INSERT - SQL syntax.

The syntax of UPDATE - SQL is:

UPDATE MyTable SET ;
  Column1 = Expression1 ;
  , Column2 = Expression2 ;
  ...

Having an = between each column and corresponding expression is closer and clearer than WITH.