Hi Cetin,

this depends on the point of view. SET FILTER works perfectly - in his rules, because it depends on FoxPro's nativ operator "==".

SELECT SQL defines his own operator "==".

There is no problem that something is 'wrong'. It is clearly documented as it is.

My problem is how to translate the statement from FILTER() or the statement I put into a SET FILTER in a way that a SELECT SQL produces the same result as the filtered part of the cursor shows.

(Or what will do same: How to translate the statement out of SELECT SQL's WHERE clause in a way that SET FILTER TO displays the same result as SELECT SQL?)


Agnes

>Agnes,
>Yes == in SQL is different and shortcut for Set Ansi On. However why should that be a problem :
>set filter to myField == myVal
>
>If myVal is not the same size as the field itself filtering would be selecting no records, something like 'set filter to .f.'
>
>IOW it's the filter causing problem there not the SQL.
>Cetin