Vincent. I agree - the better way to go (if not in a total rush) is to re-write the code for a proper implementation - as opposed to setting the Behaviour to the older 7 version. So - that is what I did - the slight re-write of the code...
-K- -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Vincent Teachout Sent: Friday, May 07, 2010 6:19 PM Kurt Wendt wrote: > Stephen - you're probably right. When I first developed the code - and was constantly looking at the data to make sure things matched up right - I actually gathered up more fields than I really needed. > > Based upon looking at my code again now - I see I really only need: > PPitem, ShpTot, store > > I'm surprised that ALL the fields must now be included in the GROUP BY specification. But, maybe this may ALSO have something to do with Matthew's response. I'm going to look into his suggestion to see how it may apply to my situation. No surprise at all - VFP9 adheres to a stricter version of SQL. I've had to bite the bullet and fix some of my older, sloppier code. Although, if I'm in a rush, I just SET ENGINEBEHAVIOUR. :) _______________________________________________ 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/289ea162f5642645b5cf64d624c66a14071a1...@us-ny-mail-002.waitex.net ** 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.
