Clear events isn't enough. You need 2 statements like:
Clear events
* PLUS the unpopular:
Return to <Procedure which contains the read events statement> 

That'll clear you out of your nested stack without having to code all
the if error exit idea in each level.

-Lew

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of John Weller
Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 8:05 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Error Handling

I have an app which runs at intervals unattended overnight.  It is
triggered by Windows Scheduler.  The error handler enters details of any
error into a log and then shuts the app down by issuing a CLEAR EVENTS
command which I understand to immediately return to the line following
the READ EVENTS line where I have my shutdown routine.  I have had an
error in an SQL statement which is inside a scan which is in turn inside
a FOR ENDFOR loop in a form method called by another method on the same
form and I am not getting the behaviour I expect.  It tries to execute
the SQL statement, executes the error handling code, makes an entry into
the log then appears to return to the FOR ENDFOR loop and executes the
SQL statement again thus triggering the error routine again - and so
on....  There is a log entry for every time the error occurs in the
loop.  I have tried tracing the code but keep getting the dreaded
'Source Not Available' when it gets to the error handling routine which
is in a separate program (but still in the project).

Any suggestions gratefully received.

John Weller
01380 723235
07976 393631



[excessive quoting removed by server]

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
** 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