Desmond: I often wonder when these things crop up that the foxuser.dbf has 'something' in it that makes the system give you undocumented/unwanted features. You said it works in your development system but not in production. So what's different? Could it be the foxuser table is throwing sand in the gearbox? Just an idea... Jack
Jack Skelley Senior Director, Programming/Computer Operations New Jersey Devils (973)757-6164 [email protected] ________________________________________ From: ProfoxTech [[email protected]] on behalf of Desmond Lloyd [[email protected]] Sent: Monday, April 21, 2014 2:56 PM To: [email protected] Subject: VFP6: Procedure File Blues HELP! I just bet one of you has experienced this problem and can offer all sorts of words of wisdom and advice..... Had a large program file that was generating "program too large" errors when trying to compile. There is a whole slew of separate procedures and functions in the original procedure file, so I moved those out to a separate file. At the beginning of the original program I set procedure to the new program name and everything seemed to work.... Note that a procedure file was already set at the time, so I made sure that I issued the additive command at the end of set procedure to. Worked fine (several months). Last week I started to experience the original program too large message again so I once again moved some procedure and functions to the new procedure file. Began to get errors that file could not be found when executing "valid functions" after certain reads. Solution was to move those back to the original program file. Testing in my development environment showed that the program worked fined, however after moving it into my "production environment" users are getting intermittent cannot find file when running the application. It is like it "forgot" it has this other procedure file open. Have added some "occasional checks" to make sure that the procedure file is open. Not sure if is actually executing or not. I have used procedure files in the past, as I am sure everyone else has, and never experience this before. I can go back to the original code and modify to include the "in" clause. But at a loss how to correct. This entire program needs to be re-written, That will take time, and in the interim everybody has to use it.... Any thoughts or suggestions? Regards, Desmond _______________________________________________ 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/7d9e7f72b813014c8fd022cf04f820edf36bf...@ex08.drdad.thenewarkarena.com ** 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.
