Hi again John,

Honestly, I've never studied Tastrade example thoroughly (perhaps, I should). I don't know, where we picked up our FrameWork code (I saw some references to odd.vcx, Harold Chatteway (?) worked for us for some time but it was long time ago), anyway, all I can tell, these classes are far from perfectness. About year ago after picking up Trey Walpole's idea of using SetAll and assign to execute some common code I made some improvements in our classes, but since I'm not the person, who is responsible for the changes in our classes, they never were implemented. Our Search form contains absolutely unmaintainable code and there are lots of holes in BaseForm and other controls. Our classes resemble MS samples code, though I think, our framework is a little bit better.

Any time, I'm trying to make a point about classes changes, I have to fight :( This is tough, you can imagine.

Our main databases use NextID approach. We have also Support and Lookups databases, which don't have NextID and Integer PK. Instead they have character codes, which are made PK. And, of course, this causes lots of problems.

Thanks again.

>BTW, Nadya,
>
>Oddly enough, in researching this I looked at Tastrade. Didja know they use APPEND BLANK in the AddNew method of the superclass? And in the DBC, there is a NewID function which grabs a sequential number from a "Setup" table. Is this what you are basing your framework on?
>
>Where this applies to your issues is that it runs headlong into a personal preference of mine: avoiding code in the DBC. I don't like procedural code in Fox DBCs, although when it comes to server databases I'm the opposite (tons of stored procs).
>
>>Do you have code universal enough for this kind of situations? Could you please show it?
>>
>>Thanks in advance.
>>
>>>Hi Nadya,
>>>
>>>I would rethink using APPEND BLANK in your framework if I were you. What I do is a method that accepts the table and primary key value and primary key field. Then I use INSERT INTO ... () VALUEs (). APPEND BLANK is going to cause problems, especially if the app comes down and a blank record gets left in the base table. Thereafter, the app will break the next time an APPEND BLANK is issued, as you are finding out.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Yup. Generate the value and use INSERT INTO instead of APPEND BLANK. Create the PK value before the INSERT.
>>>>
>>>>Append blank is in our FrameWork :( I don't want to write special code for this particular form, though it seems like I must.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Hi everybody,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I have a table, there field Code (Character 6) is made PK. This table contains one blank record (this is by design). Now, each time I'm issuing append blank, I get an Error "Uniqueness of indexes is violated". I'm thinking about adding a default value for this field, but I don't want to use NextID table approach, because this database doen't have a NextID table and I don't want to change it.
>>>>>>Therefore I'm seeking for the idea of a function, which will generate Unique ID automatically (Char 6).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Or may be you have other ideas? Simple way, which was suggested by my manager, just make this index to be regular and deal this checking on the form level. I disagree, because our data is not secure enough, so if somebody will edit this table directly, there is a chance for adding duplicates.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>What do you think? I know, it's not recommended to use character PK (meangful), but this table was designed long time ago and I don't want to change it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Thanks in advance.