Hey Stephen - sorry its taken me so long to respond to your reply. You know I always appreciate your insights - all joking aside...
1st - I'm not actually compiling the screen into an EXE. Refer to one of my previous replies to this thread to understand why. To answer your other questions in your 1st paragraph below. I found the Version command in VFP - that let's me know if I am currently operating under VFP7 vs. VFP9. Once I know the difference I then know which types of routines to call. If in VFP7 - then I call the routines for the OLD type system, routines that are already in the currently active Procedure file. Those routines allow for doing the data look-ups. And, when they ARE Doing the data lookups - its all a bunch of SAY/GET/READS. I make all the current controls on my Form InVisible - and then the old type of commands run. It runs Right in my Form. After the lookup is done - control returns back to the Control on my Form - and I make all the Controls Visible again. Now - if its running under VFP9 - my code now calls other Forms for doing the data look-ups. I hope this makes sense. Once I am done writing this reply - I will send you Directly off-list another e-mail, with the screenshots - basically what I sent my boss earlier today - so he can see the current progress on this project. Since, actually - it was HE who asked for me to make the same screen work under the VFP7 and VFP9 system. Actually - since I brought that up, I might as well add. Its strange how this occurred. We planned out this proposal on what we were going to do - based upon our client's request. (They are actually our Very Biggest client - so, around here - we kinda kiss their buttocks a bit...). Well - the client approved the proposal, signs it - BUT, then, proceeds to WRITE By Hand on the proposal to add the Request that the new upgrades must ALSO Be applied to their Newer system - NOT just the older system. He kinda SLID that in there. I was kinda shocked - and I even told my boss it's a Lot more work - and that we shoulda charged more for it. But - heck - whose gonna listen to me... -K- -----Original Message----- From: profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com [mailto:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Stephen Russell Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 11:46 AM On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:22 AM, MB Software Solutions, LLC <mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com> wrote: > On 6/21/2012 11:07 AM, Kurt Wendt wrote: >> But - Stephen - why bother. Those 3 lines of code I showed - are SO >> UTTERLY Simple - and does exactly what's need. Why waste time and make >> things more complex than they need to be? ------------------- How do you separate what the VFP9 UI presents vs the VFP7 one? I thought that there were differences between them outside of the controls vs @say @get. I thought the whole exercise was to make a builder that would work in either compiler for presentation. I work in ERP an system and that is all we have are complex metadata that run intended UI and process depending on who you are and who you are selling to or buying from. That system is by a vendor and is all java driven. So we have set up that each sales order checks the contract to identify if the user needs to add in freight components or are they automatically done for them. Those components are reusable stacking and separators to protect the product for delivery to user and they have to ship them back to us. That db has a table count of only...... 27,387 -- Stephen Russell Sr. Analyst Ring Container Technology Oakland TN 901.246-0159 cell [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com 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/289ea162f5642645b5cf64d624c66a140e260...@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.
