I don't see what you're asking. The failures you encountered seem perfectly reasonable if you forget 'memo' with scatter. On the other hand, I've found scatter ... name this to be problematic since my this's ususally have property names (eg 'name') that duplicate & conflict with field names in the tables in question. -Lew
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Davies Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 11:50 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: ca's with scatter name objects just a word of warning - don't do what I did: it just took me about 6 hours to sort this one :- I set up a ca to initially open with no data, so I did 'scatter name this additive' from it in the init of my oData object .. after the user edits some controls bound to oData... I do 'gather name this memo ... tableupdate(.F., .T., 'curXyz')' elsewhere I do cursorfill on curXyz and 'scatter memo name this additive' but the controls bound to oData are in-accessible and trying to type into them gives 'file is read only' Naturally I spent ages looking at enabled properties and re-doing database privs and testing whether editboxen were different... as is fairly obvious from the above (without all the other code round it) I had initially scattered without the memo fields, and surprise! all the bound controls that failed were sourced from memo's. I had to delete all the test database records and re-create them with 'memo' in the original scatter, they then become editable on subsequent retrievals. OK I guess I should have put 'memo' in from the start in both scatters, but it's a bit difficult to see why it failed, and why it failed in the way it did. anyone come across anything similar? Andrew Davies MBCS CITP - AndyD 8-)# ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. Please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] with any queries. ********************************************************************** [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** 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.
