Once again I am indebted to all my friends on Profox
"Evaluate" does the job just perfect for me

Sytze


On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 2:22 AM, Cathy Pountney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> Reports won't accept macro expansions such as &FieldName .. but they will
> process EVALUATE(FieldName).
>
> Cathy Pountney
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
> Of Sytze de Boer
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 7:03 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: VFP9-reports
>
> Sorry for such a basic foxpro issue,
> Please help me out
>
> I have a table where the 1st column is a constant called CODE, but the next
> 12 columns will not always be called the same.
> e.g., Depending on the period of the report, the 2nd column could be called
> C_2006_01 or C_2008_01 (3rd column same, etc)
>
> This is not causing me any issues (in fact this is how I want it)
> But it becomes an issue when I want to print a report where I'm stuck for
> expressions
> >From the command prompt I can say repfld2=field(2)
> It correctly returns "C_2006_01"
> When I say ?&repfld2 , it returns the correct value (say $1000)
> But a report won't accept an expression of &repfld2
>
> Any suggestions are welcome
>
> --
> Regards
> Sytze de Boer
> Kiss Systems
> Ph: 64-7-8391670, Mob:021 937611, Skype: kissman2
> www.kiss.co.nz
>
>
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> multipart/alternative
>  text/plain (text body -- kept)
>  text/html
> ---
>
[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
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.

Reply via email to