Scott:
I have run into the same problem (7.5) and the main reason, AFAIK, is not the length of your return variable but the length of the choose string. For example, the following code will allow me to select only 22 items: so, I have limited the selection to 20; the column fwo_no is TEXT 8 CHOOSE vfwo_no_txt FOR #VALUES + FOR ((LJS(fwo_no,10))&(LJS(equip_code,14))&(LJS(freason ,20))),fwo_no + FROM fwo_file WHERE fwo_no LIKE '07%' ORDER BY fwo_no ASC + CHKBOX 50 + TITLE 'Select up to 50 Work Orders...' + CAPTION 'Work Order Selection...' LINES 30 FORMATTED If you trace the code, you will get the message" "Insufficient memory to continue this function" The code below is the same code except the selection string is shorter and it does allow me to select at least 50 items: CHOOSE vfwo_no_txt FOR #VALUES + FOR ((LJS(fwo_no,10))),fwo_no + FROM fwo_file WHERE fwo_no LIKE '07%' ORDER BY fwo_no ASC + CHKBOX 50 + TITLE 'Select up to 50 Work Orders...' + CAPTION 'Work Order Selection...' LINES 30 FORMATTED Note that the return string is the same in both cases. I believe that I reported this condition a while back and I was under the impression that it had been resolved in 7.6/8.0. The workaround is to reduce the length of the choose string. Javier, Javier Valencia 913-915-3137 _____ From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Whitish Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 1:47 PM To: RBASE-L Mailing List Subject: [RBASE-L] - Re: Choose command with CHKBOX n option The workorders being selected are up to 5 digit numbers so assuming they are all that big the data would take up 16x5 = 80 + 14 ','s separating the numbers. 94 characters is all it will accept. --- On Sun, 6/29/08, MikeB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: MikeB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [RBASE-L] - Re: Choose command with CHKBOX n option To: "RBASE-L Mailing List" <[email protected]> Date: Sunday, June 29, 2008, 7:41 AM In any event the total length of the Return value from a CHOOSE cannot approximately exceed 4k in length. Just what is the length of the data in WorkOrder#? (not the field length, but the length of the data) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Whitish" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "RBASE-L Mailing List" <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 12:15 AM Subject: [RBASE-L] - Re: Choose command with CHKBOX n option Thanks for the response Ken, I have defined vWorkOrders as text 500 and as NOTE with the same results. Scott --- On Sat, 6/28/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [RBASE-L] - Re: Choose command with CHKBOX n option To: "RBASE-L Mailing List" <[email protected]> Date: Saturday, June 28, 2008, 11:26 PM Scott, I tried the choose command with the latest release. I was able to select more than 16. Is vWorkOrders defined in such a way the variable cannot hold all that is selected? Text should default to 1500. Regards, Ken ----- Original Message ----- From: Scott Whitish Date: Saturday, June 28, 2008 9:08 pm Subject: [RBASE-L] - Choose command with CHKBOX n option To: [email protected] (RBASE-L Mailing List) > I am using the following command in an eep launched on entry > into a form field. The vHospitalID is choosen in the previous > form field. I have tried defining vWorkOrdes as a large 250 > Character Text field and as a NOTE field, with the same results. > The number following the CHKBOX is supposed to determine how > many choices the user can check from the list. However no matter > what I set it to in the command only allows 16 items to be > checked. Is the a known bug in the command. I have tried it in > both 7.5 and 7.6. The way this command is written you should be > able to choose up to a hundred items according to the documentation. > > choose vWorkOrders + > from #values for + > (WOPrefix & Ctxt(WorkOrder#)& ' ' & ctxt(ServiceDate) & > ctxt(TotalAmount)),+ WorkOrder# from WOHeader where HospitalID = > .vHospitalID + > order by PO#,workOrder# Chkbox 100 + > title 'Choose InSite Work Orders to Assign' Caption 'Assing > Sales Order#s' lines 25 > > Any thoughts would be appreciated. > Scott Whitish > > >
