Sorry I was out to lunch

"unmaintainable code" I am the programmer and the inefficient code is easy for me to find errors, once again, I will bet anything that the error isn't in the code, but for some reason you keep going back to the "quality" of the code, and just like I stated in the past without argument that poor quality code doesn't equal errors. So once again I am saying that that is a non-issue and has nothing to do with the error

So in short I don't care how the code "looks" or the speed at which it goes through the code cause that is a null point, i.e. that isn't the issue or the problem

I wrote the post hoping someone else has had a similar problem or some insight to the error, not for someone to go off on tangents talking about the irrelevant issues like quality of code, I mean really this isn't a issue re-doing the code once the form is complete is simple cause I know all of the issues and no new ones will pop-up, I can't say in the beginning what is the best way because it is a road that I haven't been on, so I do things a little different then the "standards" I do things real basic in the beginning so it is easy to modify and easier to clean up once complete

so unless you have a good educated guess on the solution or some insight to a "real" problem that I miss and that could turn up later, then please stop telling me about irrelevant issues like quality of the code, because to be blunt I did warn you before the code that I knew that it was sloppy, so why beat a dead horse????


>Stephen,
>
>I've read all messages in this particular thread and I believe I read something from you in the past, though I don't recall, what were the others. The point was to do it from the beginning, write it simple and maintainable. Or you're implementing suggestions from "How to write unmaintainable code" site?
>
> Not seeing the actual problem and form we can only shoot in the dark or give advices like I or Will or Vlad gave you. YMMV.
>
>
>
>>Now did you even read my other messages? I have create and sold 20-30 programs in visual and dos been offered 6 jobs paying 45k-55k “MEI” the school that creates the official Microsoft FoxPro course manual even offered me a job after seeing 1procedure I did that handled letter incrementing, once everything works I go back and beutify the code, the code works but is not efficent, inefficent doesn't equal errors, does it?
>>
>>Cause if it does it's news to me, and I will take the time to go back and beutify/simplify the code, but if anyone wants to take bets saying it will fix the error, let me know I need some easy money
>>
>>
>>>I agree, with that Vlad said. Do it once from the beginning (take all advices, Will's for example is really good one) and simplify the code and make it efficient. It might be not directly related with this problem, but you can easily read through the code, understand and maintain it.
>>>
>>> I understand, that sometimes perfomance and code efficiency is sacruficed, if the code works...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hi!
>>>>
>>>>Its much the same as I suggested about "parts" of the form. Try to locate the exact thing that causes problem. With such a complex form you require a regular, strict approach like I described. Otherwise this will going to look like a catching of the bug running somewhere underground of the large field.
>>>>
>>>>As about the kiddie code, I guess it is a good reson to say that you require to learn more about OOP and good programming code writing. This will eliminate 90% of such weird errors in VFP application. Just good discipline in codeing and standards is the best preventive thing.
>>>
>>>Exactly!
>>>>
>>>>HTH.
>>>>
>>>>>Well, just set step on in the top of refresh method and execute it line by line to see, what's the problem. It might be related with checkboxes behavior.
>>>>>
>>>>>If you think it's related with navigation button class, trace it down from there...
>>>>>
>>>>>>Nadya, Don't take this personal, this "refresh" problem is getting to me
>>>>>>it really seems to be conntect to the navigation button class
>>>>>>
>>>>>>everything in the refresh is needed because of the navigation buttons and the nature of the form with graphical checkboxes, calling extra methods will slow the program down just as much, also I think that is the shortest refresh method I have in my "complex forms"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>unefficiencies, unefficiencies. well thats kinda why I said "kiddie code"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>unefficiencies is not the issue or the problem, if you like nit pick something I all ready said wasn't golden, then do so to yourself, I am worrying about programmatic errors, beautifying code is the last thing I am worrying about
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I do a lot of my coding styles so it is easier for me to spot errors, once I am sure that everything runs smooth, then I go back and simplify the code for efficiency
>>>>>>
>>>>>>everytime you try and respond to a problem I am having you go off on tangents on unrelated issues, I do greatly appreciate all input but could you stick with the topic??
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Stephen,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>My advise to you would be re-think your logic. Are you sure, you want to put all this complicated logic in Refresh method of the form? It seems to be not efficient. It's much better, in my opinion, to put such logic in Form's custom method and call it only when it's needed. I didn't try to analyze the code, though bunch of unefficiencies caught my yes immediatelly. For instance, you don't have to run replace statement multiple times if you can do one replace command. It should be quickier, though the difference might be unnoticable.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Anyway, look though the code carefully, make adjustments, when see, if you can reproduce the problem.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Finally, checkboxes have some funny behavior too. Check quite recent posts from Barbara Paltiel about this problem...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>No done that didn't help a bit
>>>>>>>>