I've found occasions where I've neglected to have something in front of the dot, principally due to using VB inheritance to copy and paste code from one method to another, and VFP seems to behave as if there is an implicit with...endwith scoped to the current object. IOW it will run and if the thing on the right side of the dot is a valid property, the code does not throw an error.
-- rk -----Original Message----- From: ProfoxTech [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ted Roche Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 2:57 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Weird Instantiation Bug Fred: Does that code actually run? Or does it error at runtime? On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Fred Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: > Then again, trapping that error at compile time would prevent this code > from working (which would probably be a good thing, <g>): > > _screen.addobject("oz","textbox") > _screen.oz.Visible = .t. > WITH _screen.oz > test() > ENDWITH > RETURN > > FUNCTION test > .left = 250 > RETURN > > > > Fred > > On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 11:32 AM, Gene Wirchenko <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hello: >> >> I am making some table modifications to my app. I completed the >> support part for one table then wanted to see the DE form for how I was >> going to add the columns. I got an interesting error when the support >> object for that table was being instantiated. This error was reported on >> the statement with the createobject() call: >> Expression is not valid outside of WITH/ENDWITH. >> The error number was 0. >> >> The real cause of the error had to be in the class about to be >> instantiated. That was the only place I had changed. Well, I did find it >> there. I had missed a period and had defined a property incorrectly. The >> erroneous line was >> lrtepup=.f >> and should have been >> lrtepup=.f. >> >> Note that VFP had not complained about the line during compilation. >> >> Sincerely, >> >> Gene Wirchenko >> >> [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ 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/bn4pr10mb0913c3789a23def071d1e38fd2...@bn4pr10mb0913.namprd10.prod.outlook.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.
