But I can't exclude these rows.  They need to be on the report, just sorted at 
the bottom.

Not a huge deal.  The report and/or Excel export is based on a temp table.  So 
I'll add 
another column to the temp table and put the same currency values in there.  
Then do 
an update to set the column to -$9,999,999 where the column is null.  This 
column won't 
show on the report or spreadsheet, but I can print the report "sorted by 
othercolumn" 
rather than my real column.

 
Karen

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Dr. Fritz Luettgens <[email protected]>
To: RBASE-L Mailing List <[email protected]>
Sent: Tue, Dec 17, 2013 8:26 am
Subject: [RBASE-L] - AW: [RBASE-L] - Re: Sorting conundrum



I solve this with views  and exclude rows where values fail and/or EQ 0 a.s.o
 
Von: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von Karen Tellef
Gesendet: Dienstag, 17. Dezember 2013 15:12
An: RBASE-L Mailing List
Betreff: [RBASE-L] - Re: Sorting conundrum
 
I thought of that, but Zero On won't work.  That would put it between the 
positive and the negative numbers.  I need it to be at the end because there is 
NO number.   Think I'll have to sort on a dummy column and assign a huge 
negative number to get it at the end.

Although now that I think of it, I do have ZERO ON anyway.   So that helps in 
math situations, but not for sorting.

 

Karen

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Dr. Fritz Luettgens <[email protected]>
To: RBASE-L Mailing List <[email protected]>
Sent: Tue, Dec 17, 2013 2:40 am
Subject: [RBASE-L] - AW: [RBASE-L] - Sorting conundrum


Hi Karen,

this is why I work with SET ZERO ON,

give it a try J

Fritz

 

Von: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von Karen Tellef
Gesendet: Dienstag, 17. Dezember 2013 01:44
An: RBASE-L Mailing List
Betreff: [RBASE-L] - Sorting conundrum

 

Using 9.5, 32-bit

I'm putting up a data browser, and it is sorting by a currency column 
DESCENDING.  Many of these rows will have nulls in that column.  Sorting in 
Descending order puts the nulls at the top of the list; I'd rather they went at 
the bottom.

I can probably screw around with adding another column to this temp table, 
assigning a dummy huge negative number to force the sorting, but I'm wondering 
if there's a "set" command or something that would help me on this.

Karen





Reply via email to