Search results

I gather from the ~n in the commands that this is intended to be a multi-line output? Is each line different?

Well, I'm pretty confused about what you are doing ... why is there a 10K iteration which contains only some form of concatenation? Do you really start the loop with 10K values available?

Something doesn't make sense. I can't see a single substitute command taking 3-5 seconds to complete.

Yes, but again, what else is happening in each iteration of the loop. If the time consumed in the other parts is substantial, as it will be if you are doing anything with a file or the database, then the speed difference of these two options is meaningless. And, if you have UI between each...

My point is that if the real loop that you run 10,000 times is actually something like this: compute file name open file put something in file close file then the compute file name time will be a tiny fraction of the total time spent in each pass, small enough that you won't even reliably be...

Allow me to be skeptical. If your usage is something related to a file, as your sample code suggests, than doing *anything* to a file is going to consume so much time that the time required to compute the file name is going to be irrelevant. The same is true if you do anything to the DB.

And, your question is? Substitute() is a lot more powerful and general purpose, having special functionality like nice handling of unknown values and facilitating translation to multiple languages. + is very simple. You are surprised that the complex one takes longer to do an equivalent...

_Field._Mandatory will tell you whether the field is define as having no nulls, but I don't know that this is an absolute guarantee that there are no nulls in the data. I expect to find some oddities in the DB. I think you can count on absolutely, especially in an application as vintage as QAD.

Are you familiar with the ABL unknown value? (There are actually several, but that doesn't matter here.) If the field in question is the only one in the index, e.g., something like shipping document, then the entire table can consist of records with the unknown value. If there are multiple...

If an index component of a unique index is unknown value, then there can be any number of records that match. I don't believe that there is any way to FIND them individually without ROWIDs, but you can certainly FOR EACH through them. You can change the unknown value to a known value at any...

Null is not considered to break the uniqueness. I can understand why that may not be intuitive, but it has always been that way.

The other possibility would be that the protermcaps are different.

Right, one of the principles of good ABL programming is to figure out what needs changing without opening a database transaction and then to open, apply, and close in the shortest possible time. If you do that, then the problem goes away.

Note also that your examples 1 and 2 do not show any scoping. Any update should be done in a strongly scoped block.

For future reference, stick this URL in your reference file for code page issues. Internationalization (I18n), Localization (L10n), Standards, and Amusements

If this is just a display, there is no reason for any locks, so all of your reads should be no-lock.

As discussed on Progress Communities, the issue here is trying to mix positional and named parameters. Once you use a named parameter, positional parameters cannot be used.

Presumably, the obstacle to install is human, not technical ...

BTW, you might want to add Internationalization (I18n), Localization (L10n), Standards, and Amusements to your bookmarks for a lot of information on this topic.

Depending on the need, you could move to an extended code page like UTF-8 that is more likely to have a superset of the characters you want, but that is a non-trivial commitment. So, you need to ask yourself why you need any particular character and how important is it to the application. If...