Walter,
>Hi doug,
>
>>I don't have any problems with that approach. I just seem to remember that the SEEK + DO WHILE combination is supposed to be a little quicker. Haven't tested it myself so I may be incorrect and I suppose in the long run it's not a real big deal.
>
>SCAN WHILE should at least as fast as DO WHILE (I've not tested it either). Since SCAN WHILE automaticly skips through the table (as oposed to DO WHILE ... SKIP) it is my favourite. I think you were confused with SCAN FOR, which indeed is slower because it is rushmore optimizable (sounds weird doesn't it ?) SCAN WHILE is not rushmore aware and just skips through a table like DO WHILE ... SKIP.
Hmm.. Probbaly so. That is, confused. <g>
>
>>It always amazes me how many different ways in FoxPro one can do any given task...
>
>This is why we like FoxPro, don't we ?
You bet!
Best,
DD
A man is no fool who gives up that which he cannot keep for that which he cannot lose.
Everything I don't understand must be easy!
The difficulty of any task is measured by the capacity of the agent performing the work.
