----------------
>I don't think you quite understand the Preview implications.
You sound so superior!
------------------

Not superior, just tired and rushed, and a bit frustrated here <s>.

I don't understand what to explain about this -- because I don't know what it is you don't understand. I can see that you *don't* understand, I just don't know what it is that holding up your visualizing the issues or why you would dismiss them.

During a Preview, you have the ability to page back to the beginning of a report, down to the end of the report, back and forth. There would be *lots* of things they wouldn't want to keep doing, if they had any choice about it -- and in fact they did have this choice internally. So they exposed this choice to us, as well. Which seems to me, all in all, a good thing.

Well, you are rejecting this line of thought, for whatever reason. Since you don't like to hear about UDFs, suppose we talk about report variables.

Report variables have the choice to be released on end of report or not, they are public.

It's quite common to initialize such a variable to a non-zero value and then accumulate values into it, and check the accumulated result after the report has run, either for storage or display to the user. You don't need a UDF to do this, and it isn't a nasty trick or a side effect. It's the way the Report Writer was designed to work -- for very good reasons. Many people take advantage of this without writing a single UDF.

In such a report, one would not want a double pass for sure. My results after the report run would be incorrect.

The point is, if the VFP developers had decided to suddenly make double pass the default, this report and the code surrounding it would be broken in a rather insidious and nasty way. Instead, they stayed backward compatible and gave you a choice. What is so terrible about this?

>L<