Still testing some things related to this and found a bit more. When I use a PLAYBACK file, instead of using NEXTROW, the edit-cursor and INTENSITY bar remain current. I previously avoided using PLAYBACK as, unfortunately, it was too slow. As such, the problem seems to be (generally) localized to NEXTROW, PREVROW, and TIERed REGIONS ...
Later, Steve in Memphis > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > Behalf Of J. Stephen Wills > Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 11:02 AM > To: RBase List Server > Subject: Forms.Region.Tiered.NEXTROW.INTENSITY => Navigation Problem > > > Okay, I've created several forms w/tiered regions and tested this > w/similar > results. I say similar because I just ain't gonna' take the time > to isolate > this behavior beyond what I've done so far, unless RBTI wants to > hire me as > a S/W Q/A Manager, and that's not a hint, because I already have a job and > I'm tryin' to spend my time doing that job, using RBase as a tool > to aid in > the performance of that job. > > Anyway, the unexpected behavior observed is as follows. While "EDIT USING > FormName ...", in a tiered region, when an EEP issues a NEXTROW > command that > continues conditionally, the edit-cursor (NOT an SQL CURSOR, but > that little > vertical bar) and the INTENSITY-highlighted tier may go > out-of-sync with one > another. This is occurs when a NEXTROW command moves off the last visible > row of the tiered region. The INSTENSITY-bar sticks at the (LastRow + 1), > whereas the edit-cursor may behave unpredictably - the "unpredictability" > facet here may simply be that I haven't identified more details about the > problem and its potential causes, interdependencies, etc. > Anyway, as EEP's > are still being called, and their execution being conditionally controlled > based on either COL||VAR values, which themselves were dependent, in part, > on an expected sequence of execution, meaning, since this an EDIT > USING ..., > this record comes before that one, everything on my form goes to > hell-in-a-handbasket. (Umm, lest I be criticized on etiquette, I > have heard > my elders and forbears use such a term and I therefore consider it to be > within the bounds of acceptable useage.) > > Okay, so I got basic. I created a table, DUMMY, with 1 COL, "DUMMY_INT > (INTEGER)". I also created a simple form, with a region of 10 tiers, > locating a Field for DUMMY_INT and defining a VAR, vDummy_INT = DUMMY_INT. > I INSERTed a couple dozen records, so that I'd have more records then the > tier could display. Then I added this Field eNtry Procedure : > > --DUMMY_INT Test > IF vDUMMY_INT < 15 THEN > NEXTROW > ENDIF > > I've tested this and so should y'all. > > Also, and I don't mean this insincerely nor insultingly, but, having > observed this behavior and now having taken the time to better > define it, I > don't want any patronizing or condescending responses from Razzak or RBTI. > As I've said, I've been a user since the release date of System V, so any > use of the terms such as "glorious" or "magical" will not only > irritate me, > but lead me to doubt those entities||attributes, Glory and Magic, > especially > as they are based on my perception of what the product does f/me now, not > what I hope RBTI is going to do to improve the product. Nor do I want to > see any admonitions, albeit gentle, about remaining current w/my versions, > as the problem either : > > - was present in the past > or > - is now present > > and, in either case, is wholly insufficient w/re: to S/W Q/A and expected > performance. > > As I said, I don't mean to be ugly, but I paid my money and I ain't that > happy right now. So, in a cooperative spirit, I'll tell you > exactly what I > do want. I want RBTI to test this, acknowledge that it is either > a bug, or > that the documentation is such that I, the user, could not have > known about > certain limitations in the use of EEP's, and that this will be > addressed in > v7, whether because it's fixed or because a change in the > architecture of RB > is such that it is irrelevant. > > Look, I been comin' back to RBase f/years now, but I keep gettin' the > feeling of being a jilted lover. So, all this rah-rah-rah-sis-boom-bah > stuff is garbage in my ears. I expect everyone at RBTI to be > proud of their > efforts, but I expect the bulk of that pride not come from vision, > aspiration, motivation, but rather from the humble acceptance of > praise from > us, the developers and users, based on our positive perception that > peformance is proof, end of discussion. As my wife likes to tell > me, and I > think I once read it in Latin, "Actions speak louder than words." > > Lookin' fwd to what y'all have to say, > Steve in Memphis > > ================================================ > TO SEE MESSAGE POSTING GUIDELINES: > Send a plain text email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > In the message body, put just two words: INTRO rbase-l > ================================================ > TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send a plain text email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > In the message body, put just two words: UNSUBSCRIBE rbase-l > ================================================ > TO SEARCH ARCHIVES: > http://www.mail-archive.com/rbase-l%40sonetmail.com/ > ================================================ TO SEE MESSAGE POSTING GUIDELINES: Send a plain text email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the message body, put just two words: INTRO rbase-l ================================================ TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send a plain text email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the message body, put just two words: UNSUBSCRIBE rbase-l ================================================ TO SEARCH ARCHIVES: http://www.mail-archive.com/rbase-l%40sonetmail.com/
