> > Thanks, Ed. Not only "correct" but dumb--it implies that no FOR clause
> > would actually work for APPEND FROM.
>
> It would work if the condition in the FOR clause applied to the
>record being appended. E.g., if you had a bunch of addresses in
>MyCursor, and you did:
>
>APPEND FROM DBF("MyCursor") FOR cState = "NY"
>
>...only records for NY would be appended, since that condition
>applies to the appended record.
Right. So I'd have to LOCATE FOR my condition (or create an index on the
condition and SEEK) and then do the APPEND. Not the way a FOR ... clause
works anywhere else (without a scope clause the default scope for FOR is
usually "ALL"; seems like they could have added scope clauses to APPEND
FROM if they were going to impose this limitation--even then it wouldn't be
the same, since the default scope would be "NEXT 1", but still...
Is this actually useful to anyone? Seems like a SELECT ... WHERE into an
intermediary cursor would be the preferred way.
Ken
www.stic-cil.org
_______________________________________________
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
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
** 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.
