In the beforerowcolchange method, do your row level validations. If that fails 
then use NODEFAULT to prevent the rowcol change. At least that's what the VFP 
help implies will accomplish what you want.

i.e.
IF RowDataIsValid()
 MySaveDataMethod()     
ELSE
 NODEFAULT
Maybe setfocus to the first column you want the use to review.
ENDIF

--
rk

-----Original Message-----
From: ProfoxTech [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Gene 
Wirchenko
Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2013 1:18 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Grid: Row-Level Validation

At 03:51 2013-11-21, Peter Cushing <[email protected]> wrote:
>I have come to the conclusion that it is much easier to allow them to 
>enter anything then don't allow them a save until they have fixed all 
>the errors.  You can have a form level validate function that can check 
>each field in turn and if you have an error description in your cursor 
>you can upate this.  Even

      It is easy to do that.  That is *NOT* what I am asking about.  You are 
not the only one missing this.  There is a reason that I keep writing 
"row-level".

      I am referring to validations that have to be done at the row-level.  An 
individual control value might be a valid value, and another one in the row 
might be a valid value, but the two together might be an invalid combination.  
I wish to catch those errors.  That is where I have the difficulty, because I 
can not reliably get the control values.


_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/DF1EEF11E586A64FB54A97F22A8BD04422968FB55D@ACKBWDDQH1.artfact.local
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Reply via email to