Conclusion: only way to use variable ORDER BY clauses is by using macro expansion.

However, this totally blocks SELECT syntax checking at compile time and thus decreases my development speed a lot.

Am I right ?


>Hy Andrus,
>
>I have no more knowledge about internals of VFP than you do. I can only speculate how it works based on my expirience.
>
>>1. If numeric expression works, why the following code will not work:
>

>norder = 1
>>CREATE CURSOR test ( test c(1) )
>>SELECT * from test ORDER BY 0+norder

>>Result: SQL: ORDER BY clause is invalid Why ?
>
>It seems that foxpro decides if value in ORDER BY clause is numeric expression or column name based on the first two characters. If the first character is a digit or the first chatacter is +/- sign and the second character is a digit than it's numeric expression. Otherwise it's a column name. For the numeric expression foxpro expects only numbers and operators +,-,*,/. Anything else will generate an error. The ORDER BY clause '0+norder' from your example above is invalid from foxpro point of view.
>
>>2. If I'm using name expression why the following code will not work:
>

>CREATE CURSOR test ( test c(1) )
>>SELECT * from test ORDER BY ('test')

>>Result: SQL: Column '' not found error. Why ?
>
>Foxpro doesn't expect name expression in Group By clause. As I explained above if it's not a numeric expression than it's column name.
>
>< snip >
>
>The bottom line, that's the way foxpro parses ORDER BY clause now. Theoreticaly, it could be changed in the future versions of foxpro and both your examples could became valid.