Cool! So I "used to be" a pretty decent xbas programmer without even knowing it back then, eh? heh-heh...
Seriously, likely more dumb-ass lucky to have known that back in 1998-1999 as I am certain it was there for a good reason. Since the code still works well I am not inclied to take that little scope clause out <g>. Also, thanks for expanding on the response re: other places such little goodies can be utilized. Now I can get my mind away from that little distraction... Gil > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Christof Wollenhaupt > Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 7:54 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Undocumented syntax, works great,but it is driving me nuts. > Where did it come from? Why can't Ifindreference to it? > > > Hi Gil, > > > The syntax question involves my use of the "RECORD mThisRecord" part of > the REPLACE command. > > That's hidden as the "Scope" parameter. As most other xBase commands, you > can apply a scope. In the help file search for "Scope clauses": > > REPLACE NEXT n > REPLACE REST > REPLACE ALL > REPLACE RECORD n > > Those can be combined with FOR and WHILE clauses which are not scope > clauses. The combination of both makes good interview questions. > Given that > table which records are updated by REPLACE NEXT 5 FOR whatever... > > -- > Christof > > > > [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.
