On Tuesday 11 November 2008 09:25:46 am Ed Leafe wrote: > On Nov 11, 2008, at 11:23 AM, Paul McNett wrote: > > The difference is probably that I've taken to setting DataStructure > > explicitly, which > > causes Dabo to not have to find it implicitly with getFields(), et al. > > I think that this is an important point. If you break the framework > paradigm (i.e., one bizobj per table), you are responsible for > handling the consequences. > > > -- Ed Leafe
Wait a second! I was trying to do it your way - using bizobj's. You have told me many times to use bizobjs. Don't bypass the bizobj's. Keep bizobj code out of the UI. I could have easily used a tempcursor and handled all of my requirements. But again I was trying to do your way. Your response was to filter the data after I retrieved the data. Well, that did not work out very well due to all the joins and virtual fields associated with the bizobj in question. And I did not see much difference between what I had to do with the filtering and just creating a tempcursor. I think this is a limitation of the Dabo framework. I'm not the only one who has had need to use a table twice. Apparently, Paul has had a need too. And if you ever had a need to use a table twice in VFP and used "use again" then you to have seen a need. Maybe not in your VFP framework but in general VFP use. Actually, I don't understand why you think it is never necessary to use a table twice. Otherwise you would have added the ability to bizobjs. -- John Fabiani _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-users Searchable Archives: http://leafe.com/archives/search/dabo-users This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
